Case Digest (G.R. No. 198729-30) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In CBK Power Company Limited v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, decided on January 15, 2014 under G.R. Nos. 198729-30, the petitioner, CBK Power Company Limited, operates the Kalayaan I and II pumped-storage hydroelectric power plants and related facilities in Laguna. On December 29, 2004, it applied for and obtained Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) approval to zero-rate its sales of electricity to the National Power Corporation (NPC) from January to October 2005 under Section 108(B)(3) of the 1997 National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC), as amended. Pursuant to Sections 112(A) and 112(B) of the NIRC, petitioner filed administrative claims for issuance of tax credit certificates for unutilized input VAT on capital goods and on local purchases of goods and services, covering the first, second, and third quarters of 2005 with BIR Revenue District Office No. 55. Alleging inaction by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR), petitioner filed a Petition for Review with the Court of Case Digest (G.R. No. 198729-30) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Petitioner CBK Power Company Limited operates and manages the Kalayaan I & II pumped-storage hydroelectric power plants and related facilities in Laguna.
- Respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) oversees VAT assessments and refund applications.
- Zero-Rating Application and Administrative Claims
- On 29 December 2004, petitioner’s VAT Zero-Rate application under Section 108(B)(3), NIRC (1997), was approved, rendering sales to National Power Corporation (NPC) effectively zero-rated from 1 January to 31 October 2005.
- Petitioner filed administrative claims for unutilized input taxes on local purchases and capital goods for Q1, Q2, and Q3 2005 with BIR RDO No. 55 as follows:
- Q1 2005 – filed 30 June 2005
- Q2 2005 – filed 15 September 2005
- Q3 2005 – filed 28 October 2005
- CTA Proceedings
- Claiming CIR inaction, petitioner elevated the matter to the CTA Special Second Division (C.T.A. Case No. 7621) on 18 April 2007.
- The CTA Special Second Division (Decision 3 March 2010) granted tax credit certificates for Q2 and Q3 2005 (P27,170,123.36), but denied Q1 2005 for late judicial filing.
- On appeal, the CTA En Banc (Decision 27 June 2011; Resolution 16 September 2011) applied Aichi Forging and dismissed all claims as belated.
Issues:
- What is the applicable prescriptive period for administrative and judicial claims for refund or tax credit of unutilized input VAT on zero-rated or effectively zero-rated sales for Q1–Q3 2005?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)