RSS

Republic v. GST Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. 190872, 17 October 2013

24 Nov

[PERLAS-BERNABE, J.]

FACTS

Respondent GST is a VAT registered domestic corporation primarily engaged in steel and iron products. During taxable years 2004-2005, GST filed claimed for unutilized excess input VAT attributable to its zero rated sales.

Period Date of Filing of
Administrative Claim
For Refund
1st Quarter of year 2004 June 9, 2004
2nd Quarter of year 2004 August 12, 2004
3rd Quarter of year 2004 February 18, 2005
4th Quarter of year 2004 February 18, 2005
1st Quarter of year 2005 May 11, 2005
2nd Quarter of year 2005 November 18, 2005
3rd Quarter of year 2005 November 18, 2005

For failure of CIR to act on its administrative claims, GST filed for a petition for review before the CTA. The CTA granted the petition. CIR filed an MR but was denied. In a petition for review before the CTA En Banc, CIR raised that the appeal before the CTA was filed beyond the reglementary period. GST asserts that under Section 112 (A) of the Tax Code, the prescriptive period is complied with if both the administrative and judicial claims are filed within the two-year prescriptive period; and that compliance with the 120-day and 30-day periods under Section 112 (D) of the Tax Code is not mandatory

 

ISSUE

Whether GST’s action for refund has complied with the prescriptive periods under the Tax Code.

 

HELD

NO, as to claims in 2004 and first quarter of 2005.

YES, as to second and third quarter of 2005.

The 120-day period is mandatory and jurisdictional.However, the Supreme Court categorically held that BIR Ruling No. DA-489-03 dated December 10, 2003 provided a valid claim for equitable estoppel under Section 246 of the Tax Code. BIR Ruling No. DA-489-03 expressly states that the “taxpayer-claimant need not wait for the lapse of the 120-day period before it could seek judicial relief with the CTA by way of Petition for Review.” As such, all taxpayers can rely on said ruling from the time of its issuance on December 10, 2003 up to its reversal by the Supreme Court in Aichi on October 6, 2010, where it was held that the 120+30 day periods are mandatory and jurisdictional.

Therefore, GST can benefit from BIR Ruling No. DA-489-03 with respect to its claims for refund of unutilized excess input VAT for the second and third quarters of taxable year 2005 which were filed before the CIR on November 18, 2005 but elevated to the CTA on March 17, 2006 before the expiration of the 120-day period (March 18, 2006 being the 120th day). BIR Ruling No. DA-489-03 effectively shielded the filing of GST’s judicial claim from the vice of prematurity.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 24, 2015 in Case Digests, Taxation Law

 

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: