Title
Supreme Court
Philippine Journalists, Inc. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Case
G.R. No. 162852
Decision Date
Dec 16, 2004
PJI contested BIR's P111M tax assessment, claiming waiver of statute of limitations was invalid due to procedural defects. SC ruled waiver invalid, assessment time-barred, and warrant void.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 162852)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Filing and initial payment
    • Philippine Journalists, Inc. (PJI) filed its 1994 Annual Income Tax Return reporting net income of ₱30,877,387.00 and tax due of ₱10,807,086.00, and paid ₱10,247,384.00 after credits.
    • On August 10, 1995, BIR’s RDO No. 33 issued Letter of Authority No. 87120 for examination of PJI’s books for the 1994 calendar year.
  • Examination findings and waiver
    • BIR audit disclosed proposed deficiency taxes (inclusive of interest and penalties) totaling ₱127,980,433.20 (VAT, income tax, withholding tax).
    • On September 22, 1997, PJI’s comptroller signed a “Waiver of the Statute of Limitation” purportedly extending the period to assess beyond the three-year prescriptive term.
  • Audit report and assessment/demand
    • July 2, 1998 audit report recommended deficiencies totaling ₱136,952,408.97.
    • On December 9, 1998, BIR Assessment/Demand No. 33-1-000757-94 was issued for ₱111,291,214.46 (income tax, VAT, expanded withholding tax).
  • Collection efforts and levy
    • Deputy Commissioner Panganiban issued a Preliminary Collection Letter on March 16, 1999 and a Final Notice Before Seizure on November 10, 1999, which PJI received on November 24, 1999.
    • PJI requested clarification and extension; BIR proceeded with Warrant of Distraint and/or Levy No. 33-06-046 on March 28, 2000.
  • Judicial proceedings
    • PJI filed a Petition for Review with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) in April 2000, challenging the assessment’s timeliness, waiver validity, and due-process violations.
    • On May 14, 2002, CTA granted the petition, declaring the assessment and warrant void for being issued after the three-year period without a valid waiver. The Court of Appeals reversed in August 2003, prompting this Supreme Court review.

Issues:

  • Whether the CTA had jurisdiction to entertain PJI’s petition challenging the warrant of distraint and levy.
  • Whether the Waiver of the Statute of Limitation executed on September 22, 1997 was valid and binding.
  • Whether the assessment issued on December 9, 1998 was barred by the three-year prescriptive period under NIRC Section 203.
  • Whether due process was violated by issuing the levy warrant without proper notice and opportunity to dispute.
  • Whether the assessment notices had become final and unappealable.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.