Title
Fishwealth Canning Corp. vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Case
G.R. No. 179343
Decision Date
Jan 21, 2010
Fishwealth Canning contested tax deficiencies; failed to timely appeal CIR's final assessment, rendering it final and executory despite dismissed criminal case.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 204992)

Assessment and Liabilities

The examination revealed that the petitioner was liable for a substantial amount in deficiencies, which included income tax, value added tax (VAT), and other related taxes, totaling P2,395,826.88. Subsequently, the petitioner settled these amounts on August 30, 2000. However, on August 25, 2000, the respondent initiated a reinvestigation and issued a subpoena for additional records that the petitioner contested on grounds of a prior examination of the same documents.

Criminal Complaint and Its Dismissal

As the petitioner failed to comply with the subpoena, the respondent filed a criminal complaint against it for violation of the 1997 Internal Revenue Code, specifically Sections 5 (c) and 266. This criminal complaint was dismissed due to insufficient evidence. Subsequently, on August 6, 2003, the respondent issued a Final Assessment Notice for income tax and VAT deficiencies totaling P67,597,336.75 for the taxable year 1999.

Protest and Final Decision

The petitioner contested the assessment through a letter dated September 23, 2003. The respondent responded with a Final Decision on Disputed Assessment dated August 2, 2005, informing the petitioner of its tax liabilities amounting to P15,396,905.24 for income tax and P63,688,434.40 for VAT. This decision also warned that failure to appeal within thirty days would render the assessment final and executory.

Delay in Filing for Review

Instead of filing an appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), the petitioner opted to submit a Letter of Reconsideration on September 1, 2005, which did not formally halt the thirty-day appeal period. Following this, the respondent sent a Preliminary Collection Letter demanding payment, prompting the petitioner to file a Petition for Review on October 20, 2005. The respondent contended that this petition was filed beyond the applicable deadlines.

CTA's Dismissal of the Petition

The CTA First Division upheld the respondent's argument regarding the petition being late and consequently dismissed it. The petitioner subsequently filed a Motion for Reconsideration, which was also denied. Following this, a petition was filed with the CTA En Banc, which similarly concluded that both petitions were untimely.

Legal Framework and Conclusion

The main legal reference in this case includes Section 228 of the 1997 Tax Code, which outlines the procedures for protesting tax assessments. It stipulates that a

...continue reading

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