GR 179343; (January, 2010) (Digest)
G.R. No. 179343; January 21, 2010
Fishwealth Canning Corporation, Petitioner, vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent.
FACTS
The Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) examined petitioner Fishwealth Canning Corporation’s internal revenue taxes for 1999 and found a deficiency. Petitioner settled this initial assessment on August 30, 2000. Subsequently, the CIR reinvestigated the same period and issued a subpoena duces tecum, which petitioner refused to heed, leading to a dismissed criminal complaint. On August 6, 2003, the CIR sent a Final Assessment Notice for income tax and VAT deficiencies totaling ₱67,597,336.75 for 1999. Petitioner protested this assessment. The CIR issued a Final Decision on Disputed Assessment dated August 2, 2005, which petitioner received on August 4, 2005, denying the protest and demanding payment. Instead of appealing to the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) within 30 days, petitioner filed a Letter of Reconsideration on September 1, 2005. After receiving a Preliminary Collection Letter on September 6, 2005, petitioner filed a Petition for Review before the CTA on October 20, 2005. The CTA First Division dismissed the petition as filed out of time, a decision affirmed by the CTA En Banc.
ISSUE
Whether the CTA En Banc correctly held that the petition for review filed before the CTA First Division (and subsequently before the En Banc) was filed out of time.
RULING
Yes, the CTA En Banc was correct. Under Section 228 of the 1997 Tax Code, a taxpayer has 30 days from receipt of the denial of its administrative protest to appeal to the CTA. Petitioner received the Final Decision denying its protest on August 4, 2005, making the deadline to file an appeal September 3, 2005. Petitioner filed its Petition for Review only on October 20, 2005, which was beyond the 30-day period. The filing of a motion for reconsideration of the denial of the administrative protest does not toll this 30-day period to appeal to the CTA. Petitioner’s argument regarding the dismissal of a related criminal case is immaterial, as a criminal complaint seeks to penalize violations, not to demand payment of tax deficiencies. The petition is dismissed.