Case Digest (G.R. No. 192023)
Facts:
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Jerry Ocier, G.R. No. 192023, November 21, 2018, First Division, Bersamin, J., writing for the Court. This is an appeal by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (petitioner/CIR) from the Court of Tax Appeals En Banc's (CTA En Banc) February 2, 2010 decision affirming the cancellation of deficiency assessments for Capital Gains Tax (CGT) and Documentary Stamp Tax (DST) issued against Jerry Ocier (respondent).In January 2001 the BIR notified the respondent that he had incurred alleged deficiencies in CGT and DST for 1999, arising from gains realized from transfers of shares of Best World Resources Corporation (BW Resources) allegedly effected through over-the-counter transactions linked to stock manipulation involving Dante Tan and others. On April 19, 2001 Ocier replied to the BIR, asserting that the transfers of 4.9 million BW Resources shares to Tan were loans, not sales. On September 26, 2001 the BIR issued Assessment Notice No. BW-99-CGT-0040-01 (CGT) and No. BW-99-DST-0041-01 (DST) assessing P17,862,848.21 (CGT) and P71,703.76 (DST), inclusive of increments. Ocier protested; the BIR denied the protest on March 10, 2003 and issued a preliminary collection notice in June 2003.
Ocier filed a petition for review with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) on December 5, 2003 (C.T.A. Case No. 6831). After trial the CTA Second Division granted the petition on February 2, 2009, reversed the BIR decision and cancelled the final assessment notices. The Division denied the CIR’s motion for reconsideration on April 21, 2009. The CIR elevated the case to the CTA En Banc (CTA EB No. 491), which on February 2, 2010 dismissed the petition for lack of merit and affirmed the Division’s decision in toto; the En Banc denied reconsideration on April 20, 2010.
The CIR sought review before the Supreme Court by petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45. The core factual dispute concerned whether the transaction transfer...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the CTA err in concluding that the BIR’s failure to formally offer its evidence was fatal to the BIR’s case?
- If the formal-offer failure was not fatal, did the evidence on record establish Ocier’s liability for CGT and DST arising from the transfer of BW Resources shares?
- Did the CTA err in affirming the Second Division’s cancellation of the BIR...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)