G.R. No. 221590 - Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Asalus Corp.

On December 16, 2010, Asalus Corporation received a Notice of Informal Conference from RDO No. 47 of the BIR relating to its 2007 VAT transactions.
On January 10, 2011, the CIR issued a Preliminary Assessment Notice (PAN) finding Asalus liable for deficiency VAT of ₱413,378,058.11 (including surcharge and interest); Asalus protested but the PAN was upheld.
On August 26, 2011, a Formal Assessment Notice (FAN) assessed deficiency VAT of ₱95,681,988.64; Asalus filed a protest (and later a supplemental protest raising prescription).
On October 16, 2012, the Final Decision on Disputed Assessment (FDDA) upheld a VAT deficiency of ₱106,761,025.17 plus a ₱25,000 compromise penalty; Asalus filed a petition for review with the CTA Third Division.

On April 2, 2014, the CTA Third Division held that the VAT assessment had prescribed under the 3-year period of Section 203 of the NIRC (no finding of false or fraudulent return) and cancelled the assessment.
On July 30, 2015, the CTA En Banc affirmed the Third Division, ruling that neither the FAN nor FDDA invoked the 10-year prescriptive period under Section 222 and that the CIR failed to establish falsity by clear and convincing evidence.
On November 6, 2015, the CTA En Banc denied the CIR’s motion for reconsideration, prompting the CIR’s petition to the Supreme Court.

Whether the CIR sufficiently apprised Asalus that the FAN and FDDA were issued under Section 222(A) of the 1997 NIRC (10-year period).
Whether Asalus’s failure to report all membership fees constitutes a “false” return under Section 222(A).
Whether the CIR’s right to assess the 2007 VAT deficiency had already prescribed under the 3-year period of Section 203.