Title
Chevron Holdings, Inc. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Case
G.R. No. 215159
Decision Date
Jul 5, 2022
Chevron Holdings sought a VAT refund for zero-rated services to foreign affiliates. The Supreme Court ruled in its favor, affirming zero-rating but disallowing claims due to insufficient remittance evidence and documentation.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 184450)

Facts:

  • Corporate Profile and VAT Registration
    • Chevron Holdings, Inc. (“Chevron”) is a Delaware corporation licensed as a Regional Operating Headquarters (ROHQ) in the Philippines, registered with the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) as a VAT taxpayer.
    • For taxable year 2006, it rendered various administrative, planning, logistics, R&D, technical support and other services to its affiliates in the Philippines (subject to 12% VAT) and abroad (zero-rated).
  • Sales, Input Taxes, and Administrative Claims
    • Quarterly sales and input-VAT data (2006):
      • 1st Q: Zero-rated P308.48 M, VAT-able P4.69 M; input tax P5.47 M (allocated 98.5% to zero-rated).
      • 2nd Q: Zero-rated P237.01 M, VAT-able P35.39 M; input tax P6.84 M (allocated 87.01%).
      • 3rd Q: Zero-rated P271.10 M, VAT-able P28.41 M; input tax P7.14 M (allocated 90.52%).
      • 4th Q: Zero-rated P459.97 M, VAT-able P41.18 M; input tax P20.69 M (allocated 91.78%).
    • Chevron carried over large excess input taxes from 2005 and 2006 quarters.
    • On March 28, 2008, filed administrative claim for refund/TCC of unutilized input VAT attributable to zero-rated sales (Jan–Dec 2006). CIR’s inaction led to petitions before CTA Divisions (CTA Cases Nos. 7776 & 7813), later consolidated as CTA EB No. 940.
  • CTA Proceedings and En Banc Decisions
    • CTA Division (June 6, 2012) dismissed petitions as premature (failure to await 120-day period).
    • On reconsideration denied, prompting elevation to CTA En Banc.
    • CTA En Banc (May 6, 2014) reversed Division, granted refund of P15,085.24 (1st Q 2006) after disallowing unsubstantiated clients, inward remittances and invoices for P10 M+ and P24.6 M+.
    • Amended Decision (Oct 28, 2014) increased refund to P47,409.24 for 1st Q 2006.
    • Chevron then filed before the Supreme Court raising four issues.

Issues:

  • Do Chevron’s services to foreign affiliates qualify as zero-rated under Section 108(B)(2) of the 1997 NIRC?
  • Was the P10,025,869.35 in sales proceeds paid in acceptable foreign currency and inwardly remitted?
  • Must prior-quarter excess input VAT carry-over (P55,784,357.71) be substantiated to claim refund of unutilized input VAT?
  • Did the CTA En Banc err by first offsetting validated input VAT against output VAT and refunding only the resulting excess?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.