Case Digest (G.R. No. 190872)
Facts:
Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, petitioner, vs. GST Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 190872, October 17, 2013, the Supreme Court En Banc, Perlas-Bernabe, J., writing for the Court.GST Philippines, Inc. is a VAT-registered manufacturer of iron, steel and other metals that sold to exporters — companies registered with the Board of Investments (BOI) under EO 226 and to PEZA-registered entities, transactions treated as zero-rated sales. For taxable quarters in 2004 and the first three quarters of 2005 GST declared zero-rated sales in its quarterly VAT returns and claimed unutilized excess input VAT totaling P32,722,109.68. GST filed separate administrative claims for refund with the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) on dates ranging from June 9, 2004 to November 18, 2005 for the respective quarters.
When the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) failed to act on those administrative claims, GST filed a petition for review with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) on March 17, 2006. The CTA First Division, in a decision dated January 27, 2009, granted GST’s refund claims but reduced the award to P27,369,114.36 and ordered the CIR to issue the corresponding tax credit certificate. The CIR’s motion for reconsideration before the CTA First Division was denied, and the CIR appealed to the CTA En Banc via petition for review.
On October 30, 2009 the CTA En Banc affirmed the First Division’s judgment; the CIR’s motion for reconsideration before the CTA En Banc was denied in a January 5, 2010 resolution. The CIR then filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of th...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did GST Philippines, Inc. comply with the prescriptive periods under Section 112 of the National Internal Revenue Code (as amended) in filing its administrative and judicial claims for refund of unutilized exc...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)