Title
Supreme Court
China Banking Corp. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Case
G.R. No. 172509
Decision Date
Feb 4, 2015
China Banking Corp. contested BIR's 1989 DST assessment on 1982-1986 SWAP transactions. Supreme Court ruled BIR's collection right barred by prescription, reversing CTA's decision.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 260990)

Petitioner

China Banking Corporation

Respondent

Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Key Dates

• Taxable years under review: 1982–1986
• Assessment issued and received: April 19, 1989
• Protest letter filed: May 8, 1989
• CIR decision on protest: December 6, 2001
• CTA Second Division decision: February 23, 2005
• CTA En Banc decision: December 1, 2005; Resolution denying reconsideration: March 20, 2006
• Supreme Court Rule 45 petition resolution: February 4, 2015

Applicable Law

• 1987 Philippine Constitution (governing Supreme Court review)
• National Internal Revenue Code of 1977, Sections 318–320, as amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 700 (three-year collection period)
• Republic Act No. 9282 (expanded CTA jurisdiction effective April 23, 2004)

Factual Background

Between 1982 and 1986, CBC executed SWAP transactions—sales of foreign bills of exchange to the Central Bank—but did not file or pay the corresponding documentary stamp tax (DST). On April 19, 1989, the BIR assessed a deficiency DST of ₱11,383,165.50 plus increments. CBC protested on May 8, 1989, alleging double taxation, incorrect liability allocation (tax falls on buyer), due process violations, lack of factual basis in the assessment, and DST exemptions under then-existing presidential decrees. CBC requested reinvestigation. The CIR did not resolve the protest until December 6, 2001, upholding the assessment. CBC filed for review with the CTA on January 18, 2002; after adverse rulings at both CTA levels, CBC elevated the matter via Rule 45 to the Supreme Court, this time asserting prescription of the BIR’s collection right.

Issue

Whether the Bureau of Internal Revenue’s right to collect the assessed deficiency documentary stamp tax from CBC is barred by the three-year prescriptive period under Section 319(c) of the 1977 Tax Code, as amended.

Ruling on Prescription

Under Section 319(c) of the 1977 Tax Code, once an internal revenue tax assessment is mailed or released, the BIR must collect by distraint, levy, or judicial proceeding within three years. The latest feasible mailing date is April 19, 1989—the date CBC received the assessment. No distraint or levy warrant was served, nor was any collection case filed in court within three years thereafter. The BIR’s filing of an Answer in the CTA on March 11, 2002—almost thirteen years later—did not satisfy the legal requirement for a collection case. Consequently, prescription has extinguished the BIR’s right to collect the assessed DST.

Effect of Reinvestigation Request

Section 320 provides that the prescriptive period suspends only when a taxpayer requests reinvestigation and the Commissioner grants it. CBC’s protest and request for reinvestigation went unacted upon until the CIR’s 2001 decision; there is no evidence the request was ever granted. Thus, the mere submission of a protest did not toll the three-year collection period.

Failure to Raise Prescription and Waiver

Although CBC raised prescription for the first time before the Supreme Court, Rule 9, Se

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.