G.R. No. 206579 - People vs. Tuyay

Respondent Gloria F. Tuyay is the registered owner of Glo Herbal Trading and Manufacturing, a sole proprietorship engaged in manufacturing, selling, and distributing the herbal product Glo-Herbal.
The People of the Philippines, represented by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), filed criminal complaints against Tuyay for alleged violations of Sections 254 and 255 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC).

On June 25, 2003, the BIR issued a Letter of Authority (LOA) authorizing examination of Tuyay’s books for taxable years 2000 to 2002. Tuyay failed to submit books of accounts.
The BIR resorted to the expenditure method to reconstruct undeclared income and determined deficiency income tax and VAT assessments.
On June 10, 2004, assessment notices were issued against Tuyay for taxable years 2001 and 2002, with total deficiency taxes amounting to approximately Php 110 million for 2001.

On June 3, 2005, BIR filed criminal complaint for Sections 254 (attempt to evade or defeat tax) and 255 (failure to file return, pay tax, etc.) violations.
On August 20, 2009, DOJ found probable cause and recommended filing of criminal cases. Informations were filed with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) on October 23, 2009.
During arraignment for violation of Section 255 case docketed as CTA Crim. Case No. 0-154, Tuyay pleaded not guilty.

Tuyay moved to dismiss the criminal case on June 21, 2011, claiming immunity under Republic Act No. 9480 (RA 9480) granting tax amnesty for unpaid internal revenue taxes for taxable year 2005 and prior years.
She alleged she filed Notice of Availment on February 21, 2008, submitted required documents including Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Networth, filed Tax Amnesty Return and made payments.
Petitioner (BIR) opposed, arguing tax amnesty did not apply due to pending criminal case at the DOJ, relying on the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of RA 9480 which excluded those with pending cases filed in court or DOJ.

The CTA Third Division initially denied Tuyay’s motion to dismiss (August 9, 2011) but later reversed on reconsideration (October 4, 2011) citing that only pending criminal cases filed in court exclude from amnesty, not complaints pending before DOJ.
Petitioner appealed to CTA En Banc, but the petition for review was dismissed (March 5, 2012) for lack of authority of BIR Special Prosecutors to file the appeal, as only the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) is authorized to represent the government.
Petitioner failed to timely submit deputization documents despite extensions, resulting in denial of motions for reconsideration and final dismissal of the petition (September 10, 2012 and February 14, 2013 Resolutions).

Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 alleging grave abuse of discretion by CTA En Banc for not recognizing BIR’s authority, and that the CTA wrongly ruled that those with pending criminal cases filed at DOJ are immune under the tax amnesty.
Petitioner admitted initial failure to submit deputization proof but claimed subsequent submission cured defect.
On merits, petitioner argued that under IRR, a criminal case is deemed pending once a complaint is filed with DOJ for preliminary investigation, thus excluding Tuyay from amnesty.
Petitioner maintained the CTA should uphold the IRR as issued by the Department of Finance, which is entitled to respect.

Tuyay argued only cases pending before courts exclude a taxpayer from amnesty – inclusion of DOJ complaints in IRR was inconsistent with the law.
She cited prevailing jurisprudence that criminal prosecution begins with filing of complaint or information in court, not mere filing of complaint with DOJ.
She invoked res judicata, pointing to a prior dismissal of a related criminal case confirming her eligibility for amnesty under RA 9480.

Whether the petition for certiorari under Rule 65 is the proper remedy to assail the CTA En Banc’s dismissal of the petition for review and related resolutions.

Whether the Bureau of Internal Revenue Special Prosecutors had authority to file the petition for review before the CTA En Banc in absence of proper deputization by the Office of the Solicitor General.

Whether respondent Gloria F. Tuyay was disqualified from availing of the tax amnesty under RA 9480 due to the existence of a pending criminal case or complaint for tax evasion at the time of her application.

Whether the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of RA 9480 may exclude those with pending criminal complaints before the DOJ from availing of the tax amnesty, despite the law’s silence on such inclusion.