Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Smith Kline and French Overseas Co.

FIRST DIVISION [CA-G.R. SP No. 30148. April 15, 1993.] COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , petitioner , vs . SMITH KLINE & FRENCH OVERSEAS CO. AND SMITH KLINE & FRENCH INTERNATIONAL COMPANY , respondents . R E S O L U T I O N CAIZARES-NYE , J p : On 08 March 1993, this Court promulgated a Resolution denying outright the Petition For Review for having been filed late. (Sec. 3, Rule 6, Revised Internal Rules of the Court of Appeals.) On 24 March 1993, Petitioner filed the instant Motion For Reconsideration of the aforesaid Resolution citing inter alia as ground therefor that the delay in filing the Petition was "a simple matter of miscalculation and mistake on the part of petitioner that his thirty (30) days extension would be granted by this Honorable Court and never entertained the idea that a shorter and non-extendible period of fifteen (15) days would instead be allowed." (P. 3, Motion For Reconsideration; p. 79, rollo .) For movant's information, the pertinent rule is herein reproduced in full: "Sec. 3. Petitions for Review . Within the period to appeal, the petitioner shall file a verified petition in four (4) copies with enough copies for each of the respondents. Upon proper motion presented before the expiration of the original reglementary period, the Court may grant a non-extendible additional period of fifteen (15) days save in exceptionally meritorious cases within which to files the petition for review; Provided, however, that should there be no petition filed within the extended period, the case shall be dismissed. A petition filed after the period shall be denied due course outright. The Regional Trial Court shall be furnished a copy of the resolution to this effect. a. Contents . The petition shall: (1) state the material dates showing that it is filed on time, and (2) set forth concisely the matters involved and the grounds for the petition specifying the errors of fact or law, or both, allegedly committed by the Regional Trial Court. The petition shall comply with the requirement for an appellant's brief. b. What should be filed . The petition shall be accompanied by a certified true copy of disputed decisions, judgments, or orders, of the lower courts, together with true copies of the pleadings and other material portions of the record as would support the allegations of the petition. c. Processing of Petition . The provisions of Section 1(b) of this rule shall apply to petitions for review. d. Judicial Action . The Court may dismiss the petition, or require the private respondent to comment on the petition, or give it due course. (1) If the petition is not prima facie sufficient in form and substance, the Court may dismiss it outright stating the reasons therefor. If instead of a petition for review, the appellant perfects his appeal pursuant to Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, it shall nevertheless be dismissed even if the Regional Trial Court had given it due course. (2) The Court may, without giving due course to the petition, require the private respondents to comment within ten (10) days from notice. (3) If the petition is prima facie meritorious, the Court shall give it due course and the petitioner shall be required to deposit the cost and other legal fees within five (5) days from notice, otherwise the petition shall be dismissed. (4) After the petitioner has paid the deposit for costs and other legal fees, the private respondent shall be required to answer the petition within ten (10) days from notice. No extension of time for filing the answer shall be granted for a period longer than fifteen (15) days. The notice shall be served on the private respondent either by personal service when he is easily accessible or otherwise by registered mail. The public respondent shall be served with a copy of the petition but need not file an answer unless so required by the Court. (5) The Court may order the Clerk of the Regional Trial Court to elevate the original record of the case including the documentary evidence and transcript of stenographic notes to this Court within ten (10) days from notice. (6) The answer of the respondent shall be filed in four (4) legible copies and shall be accompanied with true copies of such material portions of the record referred to therein together with other supporting papers, serving a copy thereof on the petitioner. The answer shall comply with the requirements for an appellee's brief. (7) After the answer has been filed, the petitioner may file a reply thereto within five (5) days from receipt of the answer, after which or upon the expiration of the period without an answer or reply being filed the Court may consider the case submitted for decision, unless the Court requires the parties to submit simultaneous memoranda, or sets the case for oral argument." (Rule 6, supra .) What is obvious need not be said. However, it may not be amiss to cite jurisprudence in support thereof that the Court of Appeals may grant an extension of only fifteen (15) days within which to file a petition for review, save in meritorious cases. (Rosario Lacsamana., et al. vs. The Intermediate Appellate Court, et al., 143 SCRA 643.) Needless to state, the matter of whether or not the ground given is meritorious is addressed to the sound discretion of the Court. Certainly, the oft-repeated ground cited, i.e. "pressure of work on equally important cases, and for lack of material time" (p. 3, Motion For Extension of Time; p. 4, rollo ) cannot qualify under the exception to the rule on meritorious cases. It was presumptuous of counsel to assume that the thirty-day extension period would be granted on the basis of the ground given. While this Court sympathizes with the petitioner's plight, still it has solemn duty to apply the law equally without fear or favor from anyone. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petitioner's Motion For Reconsideration dated March 22, 1993 is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. SO ORDERED. Puno and Torres, Jr . , JJ . , concur.