GR L 23501; (May, 1967) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-23501 May 16, 1967
FILIPINAS INVESTMENT and FINANCE CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, respondent.
FACTS
The Commissioner of Internal Revenue, through the Director of Regional District No. 3, issued a letter dated April 18, 1961, assessing petitioner Filipinas Investment & Finance Corporation the sum of P5,007.00 as advance sales tax on an automobile purchased from a tax-exempt individual, plus a P300.00 compromise penalty. Petitioner disputed this assessment via a letter dated May 15, 1961, requesting its cancellation. The BIR Assistant Regional Director sent a demand letter dated June 21, 1961, to which petitioner replied, referencing its pending protest. Respondent Commissioner denied petitioner’s request for cancellation in a letter dated August 17, 1962. The record does not show when petitioner received this denial, but petitioner reiterated its request in a letter dated September 28, 1962, received by the Commissioner on October 1, 1962. Meanwhile, the BIR record was transmitted for collection on September 24, 1962, and a Regional Director sent another demand letter dated September 25, 1962, enclosing a copy of the August 17, 1962 denial. Petitioner answered this on October 18, 1962. On January 23, 1963, petitioner moved for reconsideration. On July 22, 1963, the Commissioner denied the requests for reconsideration, which denial petitioner received on August 12, 1963. On September 11, 1963, petitioner filed its petition for review with the Court of Tax Appeals. The Tax Court dismissed the petition, finding it was filed 33 days from the deemed receipt of the appealable decision (the August 17, 1962 letter), beyond the 30-day period prescribed by law.
ISSUE
Whether the petition for review filed with the Court of Tax Appeals was filed within the 30-day reglementary period prescribed in Section 11 of Republic Act No. 1125.
RULING
No, the petition was filed beyond the reglementary period. The appealed resolution of the Court of Tax Appeals is affirmed. The Commissioner’s letter of August 17, 1962, denying petitioner’s request for cancellation, constitutes the appealable decision on the disputed assessment. Petitioner’s subsequent letters of September 28, 1962 and January 23, 1963 were mere pro-forma requests for reconsideration, as they did not adduce new facts or arguments. The period to appeal from the August 17, 1962 decision is jurisdictional and non-extendable. The Court of Tax Appeals correctly computed that petitioner consumed 33 days from the deemed receipt of the August 17, 1962 decision to the filing of the petition on September 11, 1963, thereby rendering the petition late.