Case Digest (G.R. No. 237524)
Facts:
Maibarara Geothermal, Inc. (MGI), a DOE- and BOI-registered renewable energy developer and VAT-registered taxpayer, filed four administrative claims in 2015 for refund/credit of alleged unutilized input VAT totaling PHP 81,572,707.81 for the four quarters of taxable year 2013. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue failed to act, and MGI elevated the claims to the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), which in Division and En Banc denied the refund for lack of proof of zero-rated sales and for failure to comply with documentary requirements in the IRR of Republic Act No. 9513.MGI petitioned for certiorari to the Supreme Court challenging (a) the CTA En Banc’s finding that MGI was not engaged in zero-rated sales under RA No. 9513 and its IRR, and (b) the denial of its refund claim under Section 112(A) of the NIRC.
Issues:
- Did the CTA En Banc err in ruling that MGI failed to establish that it was engaged in zero-rated sales under Republic Act No. 9513 and its IRR?
- Did the CTA En Banc err
Case Digest (G.R. No. 237524)
Facts:
- Parties and corporate registrations
- Maibarara Geothermal, Inc. (MGI) is a Philippine corporation and registered Renewable Energy (RE) Developer for the 20 MW Maibarara Geothermal Power Generation Project under DOE Certificate of Registration No. GRESC 2011-01-025 and BOI Certificate of Registration No. 2011-006.
- MGI is a VAT-registered taxpayer with the BIR under Certificate of Registration No. OCN3RC0000483772 and TIN 007-843-328-000.
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) is the respondent against whom MGI filed refund claims.
- Administrative claims and amounts
- MGI filed four administrative claims for refund of alleged unutilized input VAT for the four quarters of taxable year 2013 with RDO No. 43A, Pasig City.
- Claimed amounts: Q1 PHP 9,027,372.28; Q2 PHP 69,816,295.84; Q3 PHP 1,621,794.52; Q4 PHP 1,107,254.17; total PHP 81,572,707.81.
- Exhaustion of administrative remedy and petitions before the CTA
- The CIR failed to act on the administrative claims.
- MGI filed petitions for review with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA): CTA Case Nos. 9119, 9201, 9254, and 9336 between August 18, 2015 and April 25, 2016.
- Evidence submitted by MGI
- Quarterly VAT returns, income tax returns and audited financial statements for TY 2010–2013.
- Electric Supply Agreements with Trans-Asia Oil and Energy Development Corporation.
- Official Receipt No. 0501 dated March 25, 2014.
- DOE and BOI Certificates of Registration.
- CTA Division findings and disposition
- The CTA Special First Division denied the consolidated petitions in its Decision dated March 4, 2019.
- The Division applied precedent requiring establishment of actual zero-rated or effectively zero-rated sales to support a refund of input VAT, citing Luzon Hydro Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
- The Division found MGI’s TY 2013 quarterly VAT returns reflected no sales.
- Testimony admissions: MGI’s Accounting Manager admitted no sales in 2013; MGI’s Legal Officer stated sales to Trans-Asia occurred only in February 2014.
- The Division held MGI failed to attribute input VAT to any zero-rated sales for TY 2013 and denied refund of PHP 81,572,707.81.
- Motion for reconsideration before the Division was denied in a July 9, 2019 Resolution.
- CTA En Banc proceedings and findings
- The CTA En Banc affirmed the Division in its Decision dated November 26, 2020 and denied MGI’s petition for review.
- The CTA EB agreed that a taxpayer must establish zero-rated sales for the period of claim or a subsequent period and relied on Section 112(A) of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1997, as amended by Republic Act No. 9337 to explain the prescriptive reckoning.
- The CTA EB found Official Receipt No. 0501 illegible and therefore insufficient to substantiate sales.
- The CTA EB further held that under DOE DC No. 2009-05-0008 (IRR) a DOE Certificate of Endorsement on a per-transaction basis was required, and records showed no such per-transaction endorsement for MGI.
- A Dissenting Opinion by Associate...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether the CTA En Banc erred in ruling that MGI failed to establish that it is engaged in zero-rated sales based on Republic Act No. 9513 and its IRR.
- Whether the CTA En Banc erred in affirming the CTA Division’s denial of MGI...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)