Case Digest (G.R. No. 172892)
Facts:
Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Bureau of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 172892, June 13, 2013, Supreme Court First Division, Leonardo‑De Castro, J., writing for the Court.In October 1994, pursuant to Monetary Board Resolution No. 1056, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) prohibited the Rural Bank of Tuba (Benguet), Inc. (RBTI) from doing business, placed it under receivership under Section 30 of Republic Act No. 7653 (New Central Bank Act), and designated the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation (PDIC) as receiver. After determining that RBTI remained insolvent, the Monetary Board, by Resolution No. 675 (June 6, 1997), directed PDIC to liquidate RBTI; PDIC filed a petition for assistance in liquidation in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of La Trinidad, Benguet (Special Proceeding Case No. 97‑SP‑0100), which the RTC gave due course and approved.
The Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) intervened in the RTC liquidation proceedings as a creditor and moved that proceedings be suspended until PDIC secured a tax clearance under Section 52(C) of Republic Act No. 8424 (Tax Code of 1997), which conditions dissolution/reorganization approval on a BIR tax clearance when a corporation has adopted a plan for dissolution or liquidation. In an Order dated February 14, 2003, the RTC directed PDIC to secure the necessary tax clearance; PDIC’s motion for partial reconsideration, arguing that Section 52(C) did not apply to closed banks under Section 30 of the New Central Bank Act, was denied on September 16, 2003.
PDIC filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 with the Court of Appeals (CA‑G.R. SP No. 80816), asserting that the RTC acted with grave abuse of discretion in applying Section 52(C) to a bank placed under liquidation by the Monetary Board. The Court of Appeals, in a Decision dated December 29, 2005 (and Resolution May 5, 2006), affirmed the RTC’s orders. PDIC’s motion for reconsideration in the CA was denied.
PDIC then filed a petition for review on certiorari with the Supreme Court under Rule 45, challenging the CA’s affirmation of the RTC’s orders directing PDIC to secure a tax clearance prior to approval of the project of distribution of the bank’s assets. The BIR maintained that Section 52(C) and related BIR‑SEC regulations required a tax ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Regional Trial Court commit grave abuse of discretion in directing PDIC to secure a tax clearance under Section 52(C) of the Tax Code of 1997 before approving the project of distribution of RBTI’s assets?
- Whether Section 52(C) of Republic Act No. 8424 (Tax Code of 1997) — and the BIR‑SEC Regulations implementing it — applies to banks placed under receivership and liquidation by the Monetary Board under Section 30 of ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)