Philippine National Bank v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

EN BANC [C.T.A. EB CASE NO. 1129. April 1, 2016.] (C.T.A. Case No. 8077) PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK , petitioner , vs. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , respondent . RESOLUTION CASTAEDA, JR. , J p : For resolution is petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated August 24, 2015) 1 with respondent's Comment (Re: Motion for Reconsideration dated September 22, 2015). 2 Petitioner prays that this Court En Banc : (1) reverse and set aside the Court En Banc's Decision dated August 24, 2015, CTA Division's Decision dated November 19, 2013, and Resolution dated January 6, 2014, and issue an Order instructing respondent to refund or issue in favor of petitioner a Tax Credit Certificate in the amount of Php114,051,845.28, representing petitioner's excess and unutilized creditable withholding tax (CWT) for CY 2007; or (2) in the alternative, remand the case to the CTA Division for the reception of petitioner's supplemental evidence and recall of the Court-commissioned Independent Certified Public Accountant (ICPA) to supplement his report and identify documents examined in the course of verification. The dispositive portion of the Decision dated August 24, 2015 states: WHEREFORE , premises considered, the Petition for Review is DENIED for lack of merit. Accordingly, the November 19, 2013 Decision and the February 6, 2014 Resolution of the CTA Special Third Division are AFFIRMED . SO ORDERED. Petitioner submits that the Court erred in denying the Petition and moves to reconsider the Assailed Decision on the basis of the following grounds: 1. The issuance by the Supreme Court of a minute resolution affirming the CTA Second Division's Decision in CTA Case No. 7444 and this Court En Banc's Decision in CTA EB Nos. 577 and 588, involving petitioner's claim for refund of excess and unutilized CWT for CY 2003, does not diminish the conclusive and binding effect of these rulings on this case; 2. The Journal Vouchers (called Transaction Tickets/Input Sheets) are the source documents which indubitably prove that the income from which the CWTs being claimed for refund was withheld (the "Related Income") [and] reported as part of petitioner's gross taxable income for CY 2007; 3. The quantum of evidence required to sustain petitioner's claim is mere preponderance of evidence, and not evidence of absolute certainty or proof beyond reasonable doubt; and 4. The higher interest of substantial justice dictates that the Court should have allowed the reopening of trial for the presentation of additional evidence, especially considering that the CTA Division has required the submission of additional evidence which were not previously required in CTA Case No. 7444. aDSIHc On the other hand, respondent in her Comment (Re: Motion for Reconsideration Dated September 22, 2015) states that the Honorable Court of Tax Appeals En Banc correctly resolved that the ruling in CTA Case No. 7444 is not a binding precedent; that the additional evidence sought to be presented by petitioner constitutes forgotten evidence; that a Motion to Reopen Trial for the reception of supplemental evidence is proper only before rendition of judgment; and assuming for the sake of argument that a Motion for Reopening of Trial is proper, petitioner failed to attach the General Ledger and other source documents; rules of procedure exist for a purpose and must be observed rather than suit the convenience of a party; and claims for refund are construed strictly against the claimant. Petitioner's motion was submitted for resolution on January 7, 2016. Hence, this resolution. After a careful review of the grounds raised and arguments presented by petitioner, We find no valid or cogent reason to deviate from our findings and conclusions reached in our Decision dated August 24, 2015, thus, the motion is denied. We reiterate that, "the Court could not verify whether the transactions in the Transaction Tickets/Input Sheets were indeed recorded in PNB's books and reported in its income tax return for the taxable year 2007 for PNB's failure to submit a breakdown and/or a reconciliation of the revenue it reported in the audited financial statements and annual income tax return for the same period." 3 Thus, the denial of petitioner's claim for refund or issuance of tax credit certificate for the alleged excess CWT for CY 2007 is proper. WHEREFORE , premises considered, petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration (Re: Decision dated August 24, 2015) is DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. (SGD.) JUANITO C. CASTAEDA, JR. Associate Justice Roman G. del Rosario, P.J., Lovell R. Bautista, Erlinda P. Uy, Caesar A. Casanova, Esperanza R. Fabon-Victorino, Cielito N. Mindaro-Grulla, Amelia R. Cotangco-Manalastas and Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban, JJ., concur. Footnotes 1. Rollo , pp. 233-256. 2. Rollo , pp. 270-284. 3. Rollo , p. 226; Assailed Decision dated August 24, 2015, p. 11.