Case Digest (G.R. No. 137793) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In the case of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. GJM Philippines Manufacturing, Inc. (G.R. No. 202695), the dispute centers on a deficiency income tax assessment made against GJM by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR). GJM filed its Annual Income Tax Return for the year 1999 on April 12, 2000. Subsequently, its parent company, Warnaco (ITK) Ltd., filed for bankruptcy, resulting in the transfer of ownership of GJM to Luen Thai Overseas Limited in December 2001. In August 2002, GJM notified the Revenue District Officer (RDO) of Trece Martires of its change of address from Makati to Rosario, Cavite, and confirmed its tax registration transfer on the same day. On October 18, 2002, the BIR informed GJM of an ongoing investigation regarding its income tax liabilities for 1999, revealing a deficiency and various disallowances that led to a claimed liability of PhP 1,192,541.51. GJM contested these findings in writing on October 24, 2002. Following several notices and assessments fr Case Digest (G.R. No. 137793) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background of the Parties
- The petitioner, Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR), initiated a Petition for Review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
- The respondent is GJM Philippines Manufacturing, Inc. (GJM), which had been assessed for a deficiency in income tax for the taxable year 1999.
- The case involves issues arising from retroactive assessment, filing of income tax returns, and the service of formal assessment notices within the prescriptive period.
- Chronology and Tax Matters
- Tax Return Filing and Corporate Changes
- On April 12, 2000, GJM filed its Annual Income Tax Return for the taxable year 1999.
- GJM’s parent company, Warnaco (ITK) Ltd., underwent bankruptcy proceedings.
- As a result of the bankruptcy, ownership of GJM and its global affiliates was transferred to Luen Thai Overseas Limited in December 2001.
- Change of Registered Address and Tax Office
- On August 26, 2002, GJM informed the Revenue District Officer (RDO) of Trece Martirez, via letter, that on April 29, 2002, it would cancel its registered address in Makati and transfer to Rosario, Cavite (under RDO No. 54).
- This change was confirmed by the issuance of Transfer Confirmation Notice No. OCN ITR 000018688 on the same day.
- The BIR’s Investigation and Assessment
- Investigation and Report
- On October 18, 2002, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) conducted an informal conference and submitted a report of investigation concerning GJM’s income tax and business tax liabilities for 1999.
- The investigation revealed alleged deficiencies for various items, including:
- Loading and Shipment/Freight Out – P2,354,426.00
- Fringe Benefits Tax – P337,814.57
- Additionally, the report included a compromise penalty and interest, amounting to a total deficiency of P1,192,541.51.
- GJM’s Response
- On October 24, 2002, GJM refuted the findings through its Financial Controller.
- Despite its protest, the BIR proceeded with further actions.
- Notice of Assessment and Subsequent Proceedings
- Issuance of Notices
- On February 12, 2003, the BIR issued a Pre-Assessment Notice along with a Details of Discrepancies.
- On April 14, 2003, an undated Assessment Notice was issued, indicating a deficiency income tax assessment of P1,480,099.29 for 1999.
- On July 25, 2003, a Preliminary Collection Letter was sent, and on August 18, 2003, a Final Notice Before Seizure was issued.
- Handling of the Assessment
- GJM claimed non-receipt of the notices—specifically, it denied receiving the Final Notice and the Assessment Notice.
- On December 8, 2003, GJM received a Warrant of Distraint and/or Levy from BIR RDO No. 48-West Makati.
- GJM subsequently filed its Letter Protest on January 7, 2004, which was denied by the BIR, prompting the filing of a Petition for Review before the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA).
- Decisions of the Court of Tax Appeals
- The CTA First Division rendered a Decision on January 26, 2010, in favor of GJM.
- The CTA First Division cancelled and withdrew the deficiency income tax assessment (P1,480,099.29) along with the associated warrant.
- The CTA En Banc affirmed the First Division’s Decision on March 6, 2012, as indicated by a Resolution dated May 4, 2010.
- The CIR later filed a Motion for Reconsideration before the CTA, which was denied, leading to the present petition in the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether or not the Formal Assessment Notice (FAN) for deficiency income tax for taxable year 1999 was released, mailed, and sent within the three (3)-year prescriptive period under Section 203 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997.
- Whether or not the BIR's right to assess GJM for deficiency income tax for the year 1999 has already prescribed.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)