TAXATION Fishwealth Canning Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 610 SCRA 524, G.R. No. 179343. January 21, 2010

Fishwealth Canning Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 610 SCRA 524, G.R. No. 179343. January 21, 2010

Facts: The Commissioner of Internal Revenue (respondent), by Letter of Authority dated May 16, 2000, ordered the examination of the internal revenue taxes for the taxable year 1999 of Fishwealth Canning Corp. (petitioner).  The investigation disclosed that petitioner was liable in the amount of P2,395,826.88 representing income tax, value added tax (VAT), withholding tax deficiencies and other miscellaneous deficiencies.  Petitioner eventually settled these obligations onAugust 30, 2000.

          On August 25, 2000, respondent reinvestigated petitioner’s books of accounts and other records of internal revenue taxes covering the same period for the purpose of which it issued a subpoena duces tecum requiring petitioner to submit its records and books of accounts.  Petitioner requested the cancellation of the subpoena on the ground that the same set of documents had previously been examined. 

Respondent sent, on August 6, 2003, petitioner a  Final Assessment Notice of income tax and VAT deficiencies totaling P67,597,336.75 for the taxable year 1999, which assessment petitioner contested by letter of September 23, 2003.

Respondent thereafter issued a Final Decision on Disputed Assessment dated August 2, 2005, which petitioner received on August 4, 2005, denying its letter of protest, and requesting the immediate payment thereof, “inclusive of penalties incident to delinquency.” Respondent added that if petitioner disagreed, it may appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) “within thirty (30) days from date of receipt hereof, otherwise our said deficiency income and value-added taxes assessments shall become final, executory, and demandable.” Instead of appealing to the CTA, petitioner filed, on September 1, 2005, a Letter of Reconsideration dated August 31, 2005.

Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration which was denied. The Resolution denying its motion for reconsideration was received by petitioner on October 31, 2006.

On November 21, 2006, petitioner filed a petition for review before the CTA En Banc which, by Decision  of July 5, 2007, held that the petition before the First Division, as well as that before it, was filed out of time.

Issue: WON CTA En Banc erred in holding that the petition it filed before the CTA First Division as well as that filed before it (CTA En Banc) was filed out of time. 

Held: The Court dismissed the petition. In the case at bar, petitioner’s administrative protest was denied by Final Decision on Disputed Assessment dated August 2, 2005 issued by respondent and which petitioner received on August 4, 2005.  Under the above-quoted Section 228 of the 1997 Tax Code, petitioner had 30 days to appeal respondent’s denial of its protest to the CTA. 

Since petitioner received the denial of its administrative protest on August 4, 2005, it had until September 3, 2005 to file a petition for review before the CTA Division.  It filed one, however, on October 20, 2005, hence, it was filed out of time.  For a motion for reconsideration of the denial of the administrative protest does not toll the 30-day period to appeal to the CTA.