Title
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. B.F. Goodrich Phils., Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 104171
Decision Date
Feb 24, 1999
BF Goodrich sold land to Siltown Realty in 1974 to retain ownership rights. BIR assessed donor's tax in 1980, but SC ruled assessments invalid as they exceeded the five-year prescriptive period.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 104171)

Key Dates

  • 1961: Land acquired under Parity Amendment
  • July 3, 1974: Expiration of Parity Amendment
  • January 21, 1974: Sale of Basilan land for ₱500,000
  • April 23, 1975: Initial BIR assessment (income tax) paid
  • October 10, 1980 & March 16, 1981: BIR donor’s tax assessments issued
  • March 29, 1991: Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) decision
  • February 14, 1992: Court of Appeals (CA) decision
  • February 24, 1999: Supreme Court decision

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution (due process, protection against unreasonable assessments)
  • National Internal Revenue Code of 1977, as amended
    • Section 331: Five-year prescription for assessment and collection
    • Section 332(a): Ten-year exception for false or fraudulent returns with intent to evade tax
    • Section 15: Authority to assess on best evidence if returns are false, incomplete, or erroneous
  • Rules of Court, Rule 45 (Petition for Review on Certiorari)

Facts

B.F. Goodrich Phils., Inc. was required by the Central Bank to develop a rubber plantation and purchased Basilan land in 1961. Foreseeing loss of American ownership rights after the Parity Amendment expired in 1974, the company sold the land to Siltown Realty on January 21, 1974, for ₱500,000, then leased it back for 25 years, renewable for another 25.

Procedural History

• The BIR examined the company’s 1974 books and assessed income tax (₱6,005.35), which was paid in April 1975.
• In October 1980 and March 1981 the BIR issued donor’s tax assessments (totaling over ₱1 million), alleging undervaluation of the sale as a taxable donation.
• The CTA modified and sustained the assessments, finding the sale false within Section 15.
• The CA reversed, holding the assessments barred by the five-year prescription under Section 331 and not saved by Section 332’s exceptions.

Issue

Whether the BIR’s donor’s tax assessments issued in 1980 and 1981 against the 1974 sale are valid despite being beyond the five-year prescriptive period.

Supreme Court Ruling

The petition is denied. Assessments issued more than five years after the 1974 return filing are barred by Section 331. The CA correctly applied the law: Section 15 authorizes initial assessments on best evidence but does not toll the five-year limit for subsequent assessments. The exception in Section 332(a) for false or fraudulent returns requires proof of intent to evade tax and a fraudulent filing. Here, the sale was disclosed, no fraudulent return was shown, and the BIR failed to demonstrate intent to evade.

Analysis on Prescription and Exceptions

  • Prescription: Tax assessments must be made within five years from filing—April 1975 to April 1980. The October 1980 and March 1981 noti

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.