Section 228 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, expressly provides that the taxpayer
adversely affected by the decision or inaction may appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals,
within thirty (30) days from receipt of said decision, or from the lapse of one hundred eighty
(180)-day period; otherwise the decision shall become final, executory and demandable. Or,
in case the decision was rendered by a duly authorized representative of the Commissioner,
the taxpayer may elevate his protest to the Commissioner, within thirty (30) days from the
date of receipt of the final decision of the Commissioner’s duly authorized representative, in
which case the latter’s decision shall not be considered final, executory and demandable,
and the protest shall be decided by the Commissioner (Section 3.1.5 of Revenue Regulations
12-99).
Instead of appealing the Final Decision on Disputed Assessment dated October 16, 2003 to this court, or elevating its protest to the Commissioner, petitioner City of Makati filed another protest dated October 24, 2003 with Regional Director Adriano, praying for a recomputation of the Final Assessment Notice dated October 15, 2003, regarding the deficiency taxes for the taxable years 1999-2001. Evidently, petitioner availed of a wrong remedy before the wrong forum.
It cannot be argued by petitioner that its tax liabilities were already compromised. Records show that there was no formal compromise agreement that was executed by the parties, as petitioner’s offer for compromise was not approved by the National Evaluation Board. Pursuant to Section 204 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, when the basic tax involved exceeds One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00), or where the settlement offer is less than the prescribed minimum rates, the compromise shall be subject to the approval of the Evaluation Board, composed of the Commissioner and four (4) Deputy Commissioners. City of Makati v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, C.T.A. Case No. 7809, December 16, 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment