Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Alvez

EN BANC [C.T.A. EB CASE NO. 2076. June 8, 2021.] (C.T.A. OC No. 020) COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , petitioner , vs. RYAN NEIL ERASMO ALVEZ , respondent . RESOLUTION MODESTO-SAN PEDRO , J p : For resolution is petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration [re: Decision dated 08 October 2020] (hereinafter referred to as "Motion") , posted on 29 October 2020, 1 sans respondent's Comment/Opposition. 2 In his Motion, petitioner reiterates his argument that this Court has no jurisdiction to review the validity of the assessment issued against respondent since it had already become final, executory, and demandable. Moreover, he opines that even assuming that the Court does have jurisdiction to rule on the assessment's validity, he stresses that the Court En Banc erred in ruling that the same is void for want of authority of the investigating revenue officers. He emphasizes that the revenue officers, in this case, were duly authorized pursuant to a Memorandum of Assignment ("MOA") signed by Revenue District Officer Rogelio T. Balanga, who he alleges is one of the authorized signatories of an MOA. After a careful perusal of the foregoing arguments, the Court En Banc finds no merit in the Motion. The CIR's contentions are mere reiterations of his allegations in his Petition for Review, which have already been passed upon extensively by the Court En Banc in the assailed Decision. As such, since petitioner failed to raise any new matter for the Court's consideration, the same finds no cogent reason to modify or reverse the assailed Decision. WHEREFORE , premises considered, petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration [re: Decision dated 08 October 2020] is hereby denied for lack of merit. cHaCAS SO ORDERED. (SGD.) MARIA ROWENA MODESTO-SAN PEDRO Associate Justice Roman G. del Rosario, P.J., Erlinda P. Uy, Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban and Catherine T. Manahan, JJ. , concur. Juanito C. Castaeda, Jr., J. , with due respect, I join J. Villena's D.O. in the Decision dated 8 Oct. 2020. Jean Marie A. Bacorro-Villena, J. , with due respect, I reiterate my D.O. Footnotes 1. Petitioner filed his Motion within 15 days from his receipt of the assailed Decision on 14 October 2020. Hence, this Motion was timely filed. 2. Records Verification Report, EB Records, p. 104.