Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Mindanao Sanitarium and Hospital, Inc.
C.T.A. EB Case No. 1807 (C.T.A. Case No. 8927) • Court of Tax Appeals • Decisions • Jan 8, 2020
Full text
EN BANC [C.T.A. EB CASE NO. 1807. January 8, 2020.] (C.T.A. Case No. 8927) COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , petitioner , vs. MINDANAO SANITARIUM AND HOSPITAL, INC. , respondent . RESOLUTION CASTAEDA, JR. , J p : This resolves the "Motion for Reconsideration [Re: Decision dated September 03, 2019]" 1 filed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) on October 16, 2019. Mindanao Sanitarium and Hospital, Inc. (MSHI) filed its "Comment (on Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration)" via registered mail on November 4, 2019, which was received by the Court on November 11, 2019. This motion was submitted for resolution on November 13, 2019. HESIcT The dispositive portion of the September 24, 2019 Decision states: WHEREFORE , premises considered, the present Petition for Review filed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is DENIED . Accordingly, the September 15, 2017 Decision and the February 20, 2018 Resolution of the then CTA First Division in CTA Case No. 8927 are AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED. CIR's ground of the Motion for Reconsideration: The Honorable Court En Banc erred in ruling that there was violation of [MSHI]'s right to due process as [CIR] failed to show proof of actual receipt by [MSHI] of the PAN. After a careful review of the ground raised and arguments presented by CIR, We find no valid or cogent reason to deviate from our findings and conclusions reached in our Decision dated September 24, 2019, thus, the motion is denied. It is worthy to emphasize that there are irregularities in the mailing and service of the Preliminary Assessment Notice (PAN) 2 as found by the then CTA First Division, which this Court agreed. The PAN is a part of due process. 3 We reiterate that, "for failure of the CIR to prove the receipt of PAN by MSH[I], due process was not complied with." WHEREFORE , premises considered, the Motion for Reconsideration filed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. (SGD.) JUANITO C. CASTAEDA, JR. Associate Justice Roman G. del Rosario, P.J., Erlinda P. Uy, Esperanza R. Fabon-Victorino, Cielito N. Mindaro-Grulla, Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban, Catherine T. Manahan, Jean Marie A. Bacorro-Villena and Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro, JJ. , concur. Footnotes 1. The correct date of the Decision is September 24, 2019. 2. Rollo , p. 103. 3. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Transitions Philippines Optical, Inc. , G.R. No. 227544, November 22, 2017.
Ask what this means for your situation
The assistant quotes the passage it relies on and links the source, so you can check every figure it gives you.