EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE:

MIKHAIL MAVERICK TUMACDER overall chairperson, ARTHUR JOHN ARONGAT chairperson for academics, JASSEN RALPH LEE
chairperson for hotel operations, KIMBERLY JOY BARAOIDAN vice-chairperson for operations, KATRINA AYN AYZA FALLORINA CUE
vice-chairperson for secretariat, IAN MICHEL GEONANGA vice-chairperson for finance, JOSE ANGELO DAVID vice-chairperson for
electronic data processing, IAN LUIS AGUILA vice-chairperson for logistics

SUBJECT COMMITTEE:
RAHABANSA DAGALANGIT subject chair, ARIANNE MALABANAN assistant subject chair, ARMIDA GERONIMO edp, DIANA
FAJARDO general principles, AVRIL ELAINE GAMBOA income taxation, MADONNA LYN CASARES tax administration and
enforcement, BRYANT CANASA value-added tax, SHERWIN MARASIGAN transfer taxes, APRIL MANUEL and GABRIEL GUY
OLANDESCA nirc remedies, ARNALDO MALABANAN JR. court of tax appeals, JOSE MARI ANGELO DIONIO real property and local
taxation, RAY ANN CO tariff and customs laws

MEMBERS:
Baby Perian Arcega, Ethel Joy Arriola, Adrian Aumentado, Paula Tricia Bagnes , Benedicto Beley, Jingle Chua, Luis Voltaire
Formilleza, Aiza Gonzales, Roniel Muoz, Gerwin Panghulan, Maria Katrina Rivera, April Salamatin, Eve Hazel Santos, Salvador
Andrew Tugade, Neo Valerio, and Janice Ivy Valparaiso
TAXATION LAW | Court of Tax Appeals

NATURE OF THE CTA
1. Court of special jurisdiction - can act only
in matters where it has exclusive, original
jurisdiction and in aid of its appellate
jurisdiction.
2. The Court of Tax Appeals is a highly
specialized body created for the purpose
of reviewing tax cases.
3. The proceedings are judicial in nature
although the CTA is not bound by the
technical rules of evidence. (R.A. 1125,
Sec. 8).
4. Procedure is governed by the Revised
Rules of the Court of Tax Appeals
(RRCTA) - AM No. 05-11-07-CTA which
took effect on December 15, 2005. The
Rules of Court apply only by analogy or
suppletorily.

LEGAL BASES
1. The Court of Tax Appeals was originally
created by virtue of Republic Act No.
1125 enacted June 16, 1954.
2. Republic Act No. 9282 amended R.A.
No. 1125. R.A. No. 9282 was enacted on
March 30, 2004 and took effect on April
23, 2004.
3. Republic Act. No. 9503 which was
enacted June 12, 2008 further amended
R.A. No. 1125.

Amendments of Republic Act No. 9282
1. The Court of Tax Appeals was elevated to
the same level as the Court of Appeals.
(Sec. 1)
2. Appeals from its decision (en banc) shall
now be made before the Supreme Court.
(Sec. 19)
3. The EXPANDED jurisdiction of the Tax
Court

Amendments of Republic Act No. 9503
R.A. No. 9503 enlarged the organizational
structure of the Court of Tax Appeals by:

Increasing the number of CTA justices
from 6 to 9 (Sec. 1)
Increasing the number of Divisions from 2
to 3, each division constituting of 3
justices (Sec. 1)

POWERS OF CTA (PCS
2
O
2
RED
2
)
1. To administer Oaths;
2. To receive Evidence;
3. To Summon witnesses by subpoena;
4. To require Production of papers or
documents by subpoena duces tecum;
5. To punish Contempt;
6. To promulgate Rules and regulations for
the conduct of its business;
7. To assess Damages against appellant if
appeal to CTA is found to be frivolous or
dilatory;
8. To Suspend the collection of the tax
pending appeal;
9. To render Decisions on cases brought
before it; and
10. To issue Order authorizing distraint of
personal property and levy of real property

Note: Power to issue writs of prohibition and
injunction is supplementary to its appellate
jurisdiction.

COMPOSITION AND APPOINTMENT OF
MEMBERS
Consists of a Presiding Justice and eight
(8) Associate Justices appointed by the
President upon nomination by the Judicial
and Bar Council.
It may sit en banc or in three (3) Divisions,
each Division of three (3) Justices each,
including the Presiding Justice, who shall
be the Chairperson of the First Division
and the two (2) most Senior Associate
Justices shall be served as Chairpersons
of the Second Divisions, respectively (R.A.
No. 9503)

QUORUM

Sessions:
Presence of
Decision:
Affirmative
Vote of
EN BANC 5 Justices 5 Justices
DIVISION 2 Justices 2 Justices

INTRODUCTION




San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
259
Court of Tax Appeals | TAXATION LAW

Provided: Where the necessary majority vote
cannot be had, the petition shall be dismissed;
in appealed cases, the judgment or order
appealed from shall stand affirmed; and on all
incidental matters, the petition or motion shall
be denied (R.A. No. 9503).





Jurisdiction of the CTA over the subject matter
can be challenged at any stage of the
proceedings. And for lack of it, the CTA can
dismiss a case ex meru metro (CIR v. Villa,
G.R. No. L-23988 January 2, 1968)

I. EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE
JURISDICTION OF CTA - DIVISION
A. Decisions of the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue

1. In cases involving disputed
assessments, refunds of internal
revenue taxes, fees or other
charges, penalties in relation
thereto, or
2. Other matters arising under the
NIRC or other laws administered
by the BIR; (via a petition for
review under Rule 42)

B. Inaction by the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue Where the NIRC
provides a Specific Period of Action
1. In cases involving disputed
assessments, refunds of internal
revenue taxes, fees or other
charges, penalties in relation
thereto, or
Other matters arising under the
NIRC or other laws administered
by the BIR; (via a petition for
review under Rule 42)

Effect of the inaction: Deemed a
denial

C. Decisions of the Commissioner of
Customs
1. In cases involving liability for
customs duties, fees or other
money charges, seizure, detention
or release of property affected,
fines, forfeitures or other penalties
in relation thereto, or
2. Or other matters arising under the
Customs Law or other laws
administered by the Bureau of
Customs. (via a petition for review
under Rule 42)

D. Decisions of the Secretary of
Finance on customs cases elevated
to him automatically for review from
decisions of the Commissioner of
Customs which are adverse to the
Government under Section 2325 of
the Tariff and Customs Code; (via a
petition for review under Rule 42)

Rationale and Purpose of
Automatic Review: To protect the
government against corrupt and
conniving customs collector

Without the automatic review by the
Commissioner of Customs and the
Secretary of Finance, a collector in
any of the countrys far flung ports,
would have absolute and unbridled
discretion to determine whether goods
seized by him are locally produced,
hence, not dutiable, or of foreign
origin, and therefore subject to
payment of customs duties and taxes.
His decision, unless appealed by the
aggrieved party (the owner of the
goods), would become final with no
one the wiser except himself and the
owner of the goods. The owner of the
goods cannot be expected to appeal
the collectors decision when it is
favorable to him. A decision that is
favorable to the taxpayer would
correspondingly be unfavorable to the
Government, but who will appeal the
collectors decision in that case?
Certainly not the collector. Evidently, it
was to cure this anomalous situation
that the provision for automatic review
by the Commissioner of Customs and
the Secretary of Finance of
unappealed seizure and protest cases
was conceived to protect the
government against corrupt and
conniving customs collector.
(Yaokasin v. Commissioner of
Customs, G.R. No. 84111, Dec.
22, 1989)

E. Decisions of the Secretary of Trade
and Industry in the case of non-
agricultural product, commodity or
article, and the Secretary of
Agriculture in the case of agricultural
product, commodity or article,
involving dumping and countervailing
JURISDICTION OF THE COURT
OF TAX APPEALS




San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
260
TAXATION LAW | Court of Tax Appeals
duties under Sections 301 and 302,
respectively, of the Tariff and Customs
Code, and safeguard measures under
R.A. No. 8800, where either party may
appeal the decision to impose or not
to impose said duties. (via a petition
for review under Rule 42)

II. EXCLUSIVE APPELLATE
JURISDICTION OF CTA - EN BANC

Over the following cases:
A. Decisions, orders or resolutions of
the RTC in local tax cases originally
decided or resolved by them in the
exercise of their original jurisdiction;
(via a petition for review under Rule
43)

Note: Real Property Tax cases
decided by the RTC is NOT under the
CTAs jurisdiction. Decisions, orders,
and resolutions of the RTC in local tax
cases do not include real property tax
which is an ad valorem tax. The
jurisdiction of the CTA concerning real
property tax cases fall under Sec.
7(a)(5) of R.A. 9282 and under R.A.
7160. (Habawel v. CTA, G.R.
No.174759, September 7, 2011)

B. Decisions of the Central Board of
Assessment Appeals (CBAA) in the
exercise of its appellate jurisdiction
over cases involving the assessment
and taxation of real property originally
decided by the provincial or city board
of assessment appeals. (via a petition
for review under Rule 43)

III. JURISDICTION OVER CASES
INVOLVING CRIMINAL OFFENSES -
DIVISION
A. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
Over all criminal offenses arising from
violations of the NIRC or TCC and
other laws administered by the BIR or
the BOC: (principal amount of taxes
and fees, exclusive of charges and
penalties claimed is P1,000,000 or
more)

Notes:
Regular Courts shall have
jurisdiction in Offenses or
Penalties where
a. The principal amount of taxes
and fees, exclusive of charges
and penalties claimed is less
than P1,000,000; OR
b. No specified amount is
claimed.
(As to Which Court Shall
Exercise Jurisdiction Follow
Rules on Jurisdiction in
Criminal Cases)
Jurisdiction of the CTA in these
cases shall be appellate.
Any provision of law or the Rules
of Court to the contrary
notwithstanding, the criminal
action and the corresponding civil
action for the recovery of civil
liability for taxes and penalties
shall at all times be
simultaneously instituted with, and
jointly determined in the same
proceeding by the CTA, the filing
of the criminal action being
deemed to necessarily carry with it
the filing of the civil action, and no
right to reserve the filling of such
civil action separately from the
criminal action will be recognized.

B. Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction in
criminal offenses over:
a. Appeals - from the judgments,
resolutions or orders of the
Regional Trial Courts in tax cases,
including tax collection, originally
decided by them, in their
respected territorial jurisdiction.

b. Petitions for Review - of the
judgments, resolutions or orders
of the Regional Trial Courts in the
exercise of their appellate
jurisdiction over tax cases
originally decided by the MTCs or
MCTCs.

IV. JURISDICTION OVER TAX
COLLECTION CASES
A. Exclusive original jurisdiction in
tax collection cases involving final
and executory assessments for
taxes, fees, charges and
penalties. (principal amount of
taxes and fees, exclusive of
charges and penalties claimed is
P1,000,000 or more)

Note: Collection cases where the
principal amount of taxes and
fees, exclusive of charges and
penalties claimed is less than one



San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
261
Court of Tax Appeals | TAXATION LAW

million pesos (P1,000,000.00)
shall be tried by the proper
Municipal Trial Court, Metropolitan
Trial Court, or Regional Trial
Court, depending on their
respective jurisdiction.

B. Exclusive appellate jurisdiction
over:
1. Appeals - from the
judgments, resolutions or
orders of the RTCs in tax
cases originally decided by
them, in their respected
territorial jurisdiction.

2. Petitions for Review - of the
judgments, resolutions or
orders of the RTCs in the
exercise of their appellate
jurisdiction over tax cases
originally decided by the
MTCs or MCTCs.

CTA: WITHOUT Jurisdiction on Final
and Executory or Undisputed
Assessments
The ordinary courts, not the Court of Tax
Appeals can entertain money claims
based on assessments that have become
final and executory. The taxpayer not
having availed himself of the remedy
(timely dispute of assessment) to permit
the Tax Court to exercise jurisdiction,
cannot be allowed to question, by way of
defense, the validity of the assessment.
(Republic v. Abella, G.R. L-26989,
February 20, 1981)

NO INJUCTION RULE
Rule: No court shall have the authority to
grant injunction to restrain the collection of
any national internal revenue tax, fee, or
charge. (Sec. 218 of NIRC)

Exception: The NO INJUCTION RULE
does not apply to the CTA pursuant to
Sec. 11 of R.A. No. 1125. It is only the
CTA that has jurisdiction to suspend the
collection of taxes when in its opinion the
collection by the BIR may jeopardize the
interest of the government and/or the
taxpayer

In such case, the CTA may suspend the
collection of taxes and require the
taxpayer either to:
1. deposit the amount claimed OR
2. to file a surety bond for not more than
double the amount being assessed.

The ancillary remedy is available only
when there is a pending appeal over
which the Court of Tax Appeals has
jurisdiction. (Commissioner of
Customs v. Alikpala, G.R. No. L-
32542, November 26, 1970)

Rationale: Lifeblood Theory

Requisites:
1. That the collection of the tax may
jeopardize the interest of the
government and/or the taxpayer;
2. That the taxpayer is willing to deposit
the amount equal to the taxes
assessed or to file a bond amounting
to not more than twice the value of the
tax being assessed;
3. That the CTA may issue an injunction
only in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction;
Note: The issuance of an order
suspending the collection is not
automatic. It depends on the sound
discretion of the CTA.
4. That the appeal is not frivolous or
dilatory

Disposition of Cases
1. Cases shall be decided within 30 days
after submission thereof for decision.
This requirement however, is merely
directory. Hence decisions made after
the lapse of said period are still valid.
(Vitug and Acosta, Tax Law and
Jurisprudence, 2006 ed., p. 420)
2. Decisions shall be in writing, stating
clearly and distinctly the facts and the
law on which they are based and
signed by the judges who concurred
therewith.
3. Publication of decision in the Official
Gazette.

Instances where CTA has No
Jurisdiction
1. It has no power motu proprio to review
tax cases
2. Over questions of unfair competition
involving use of simplified bookkeeping
records, because this does not involve
any tax assessment or refund
3. Over decisions of the Philippine Ports
Authority





San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
262
TAXATION LAW | Court of Tax Appeals



A. When: Period Within Which to File
Appeal To CTA
1. Within 30 days after the receipt of the
decision or ruling or after the
expiration of the period fixed by law for
action (Sec. 11, R.A. No. 1125 as
amended by R.A. No. 9282)

Note: For the CTA to have jurisdiction,
the BIR Commissioner must have first
rendered his decision, otherwise,
there is nothing to review and
jurisdiction would not be acquired

2. "If the Commissioner or his duly
authorized representative fails to act
on the taxpayer's protest within one
hundred eighty (180) days from date
of submission by the taxpayer of the
required documents in support of his
protest, the taxpayer may appeal to
the Court of Tax Appeals within thirty
(30) days from the lapse of the said
180-day period, otherwise, the
assessment shall become final,
executory and demandable" (CIR v.
Lascona Land Co., CA-GR SP No.
58061).

Note: The qualification above that
otherwise, the assessment shall
become final, executory and
demandable (from last par., Sec. 228,
NIRC.) the taxpayer may instead opt
to await the decision of the CIR on the
disputed assessment even beyond the
180-day period. In this case, the FAN
will not become final and executory. If
the taxpayer waits for the decision,
which turns out to be adverse to him,
only then must he appeal such
adverse decision to the CTA within 30
days from receipt thereof. (RRCTA,
A.M. No. 05-11-07-CTA, Rule 4, SEC.
3(a)(2) & RCBC v. CIR, G.R. No.
168498. April 24, 2007)

Thirty (30) Day Prescriptive Period for
Appeal with the CTA
1. Runs from the date the taxpayer
receives the appealable decision or 30
days after the lapse of 180 days
(within which the BIR should act)

Note: There two periods are mutually
exclusive.

2. Jurisdictional
Effects of failure of the taxpayer to
appeal on time:
a. Renders the action final,
executory and demandable
b. Assessment is considered correct
and all that is necessary is for the
Commissioner to enforce the
collection of the tax by summary
remedies or judicial action
c. Taxpayer in a proceeding for
collection by judicial action may
raise only defenses of absence of
jurisdiction, collusion between the
parties or fraud.

3. Non-extendible
After the 30-day period, an
assessment may no longer be
disputed through the simple expedient
of paying the protested tax and by
subsequently claiming it as a refund
within the period of two years from
date of payment

Rationale: He would be doing
indirectly what he could not do
directly, that is, open an assessment
that has become final

Motion for Reconsideration/New Trial
A party adversely affected by a ruling,
order or decision of a Division of the CTA
may file a motion for reconsideration or
new trial before the same Division of the
CTA within fifteen (15) days from notice
thereof: Provide, however, That in criminal
cases, the general rule applicable in
regular Courts on matters of prosecution
and appeal shall likewise apply. (par. 3,
Sec. 11 of R.A. 1125, as amended)

1. Requests or motions for
reconsideration, does not suspend the
running of the period to appeal.
2. A pro forma request for
reconsideration or one which is
directed to the Secretary of Finance
does not suspend the period.

A party adversely affected by a decision or
ruling of the CTA en banc may file with
the Supreme Court a verified petition for
review on certiorari pursuant to Rule 45 of
the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. (Sec.
19, R.A. 9282)


APPEALS OF DECISION OF THE CTA



San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
263
Court of Tax Appeals | TAXATION LAW

B. What: Subject of Appeal
Only a Final Decision Is Appealable to
the Court of Tax Appeals
A decision is appealable when it
constitutes the final action taken by him or
his authorized deputies with respect to the
taxpayers liability.
1. Preliminary collection letters, post
reporting notices and pre-assessment
notices are not appealable, because
they are not the final decision of the
Commissioner.
2. Rather, it is the action taken by the
Commissioner in response to the
taxpayers protest on the assessment
that would constitute an appealable
decision.
3. At times there is an exchange of
communication between the taxpayer
and the Commissioner, and the latter
states that his action is final, then,
period for appeal begins to run.
4. Commissioner must state that his
decision is final for period of appeal to
run.

Instances when decisions are final:
1. A demand letter for tax deficiency
issued and signed by an authorized
subordinate officer with the warning
that failure to pay would result to
issuance of a warrant of distraint and
levy without further notice (Oceanic
Wireless Network Inc. v. CIR, G.R.
No. 148380, Dec. 9, 2005). A letter of
BIR Commissioner reiterating previous
demand to pay an assessment.
(Commissioner v. Ayala Securities
Corp G.R. No. 29485 Mar. 31. 1976)
2. The filing of a judicial action for
collection may be treated by the
taxpayer as a denial of a protest
(Commissioner v. Union Shipping
G.R. No. 66160. May 21, 1990)
3. A Formal Letter of Demand with
Assessment (FAN) issued by the BIR
to a taxpayer, although ordinarily must
first be administratively protested by
the latter, but it appearing from the
language and the tenor thereof that
the same is the final decision of the
CIR on the matter and that the remedy
of the taxpayer is to appeal the
decision, then such FAN may already
be the subject of an appeal to the CTA
by the taxpayer. (Allied Banking
Corporation v. CIR, G.R. No. 175097,
February 5, 2010)

Instances where CTA would have
jurisdiction even if there is no decision:
1. If the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue has not acted in a refund
case and the two year prescriptive
period is about to expire.
Rationale: In fairness to the taxpayer
so as not to deprive him of his day in
court.
2. If the Commissioner of Customs has
not rendered a decision on an
application for refund of internal
revenue taxes and the suit is about to
prescribe.
Rationale: If the taxpayer waits, then
his right of action prescribes.

New Issues Cannot Be Raised for the
First Time on Appeal
Rule: New issues cannot be raised for the
first time on appeal.

Rationale: The court which is supposed to
review would not review but determine and
decide for the first time, a question not
raised at the administrative forum
(Commissioner of Internal Revenue v.
Wander Philippines, Inc. G.R. No. 68375,
Apr. 15, 1988)

Exceptions:
1. Defense of prescription
Rationale: This is a statutory right
(Visayan Land Transportation v.
Collector CTA Case No. 1119,
Sept.30, 1964).

2. Errors of administrative officials
Rationale: State can never be in
estoppel and lifeblood theory
(Commissioner vs. Procter and
Gamble Phils. Mfg. Corp, G.R. No.
66838, April 15, 1988).

Note: However, this was reversed in
Supreme Courts subsequent
resolution wherein it was held that in
the absence of explicit statutory
provisions to the contrary, the
Government must follow the same
rules of procedure which bind private
parties. (Commissioner v. Procter
and Gamble, G.R. No. 66838,
December 2, 1991)

See also General principles of
Taxation: Rule of NO Estoppel Against
the Government)




San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
264
TAXATION LAW | Court of Tax Appeals
C. Who: Persons Who Can File An Appeal
to the CTA
1. Any party adversely affected by a
decision or ruling or inaction of
a. The Commissioner of Internal
Revenue;
b. The Commissioner of Customs;
c. The Secretary of Finance;
d. The Secretary of Trade and
Industry;
e. The Secretary of Agriculture;
f. The Central Board of Assessment
Appeals; and
g. The Regional Trial Courts


2. Stockholders of dissolved corporation.

Rationale: They could be held
personally liable for the unpaid
deficiency assessments of a dissolved
corporation in proportion to their
distributive shares in the dissolved
corporation (Tan Tiong Bio v. BIR,
G.R. No. L-15778 April 23, 1962).

Note: The right to appeal under Sec. 11
of R.A. No. 1125 is impliedly denied to
the government or any of its agencies,
instrumentalities or officials. (Coll. Of
Customs v. CTA., 102 Phil. 244, 1957).
When a situation arises where the
taxpayer neither pays the tax assessed
against him nor contests its validity
before the CTA, the only remedy left to
the government, aside from distraint and
levy, is to enforce the collection by judicial
action in the ordinary courts of justice
(Republic v. Dy Chay, 1 SCRA 975) or the
CTA, as the case may be.

BUT, the government may appeal from the
decision of the CTA to the SC by filing a
verified petition for review on certiorari
pursuant to Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.

D. How: Modes of Appeal
1. By filing a petition for review (for
cases heard by a CTA Division)
under a procedure analogous to that
provided for under Rule 42 of the 1997
Rules on Civil Procedure, decision,
ruling, or inaction of the:
a. Commissioner of Internal
Revenue,
b. Commissioner of Customs,
c. the Secretary of Finance,
d. the Secretary of Trade and
Industry or
e. The Secretary of Agriculture

Requirements:
a. Filing of a verified petition for
review with the CTA in 7 legible
copies
b. deposit of filing fees
c. proof of service to the adverse
party
d. certification of non-forum shopping
e. prior filing of motion of new trial or
reconsideration
15 day period under Rule 42
does not apply, 30 day period
applies

2. By filing a petition for review (for
cases heard by the CTA enbanc)
under a procedure analogous to that
provided for under Rule 43 of 1997
Rules on Civil Procedure, decisions or
rulings of:
a. The Central Board of Assessment
Appeals and
b. The Regional Trial Courts in the
exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction

Requirements:
Filing of verified petition for review
in 7 legible copies with the CTA
Proof of service of a copy thereof
to the adverse party and on the
court or agency a quo
Certification of non-forum
shopping
Filing of a motion for
reconsideration or new trial when
proper
period of appeal is not 15 days
under Rule 43 but 30 days

Burden of Taxpayers on Appeal to CTA
It is the burden of taxpayers on appeal to
CTA to prove by a full disclosure of data
on his possession that:
1. The tax assessment is wrong;
2. The tax assessment is merely a
presumption and not based on actual
facts; and
3. The correct computation of liability, if
any.

The burden of proof is on the taxpayer
contesting the validity or correctness
of the assessment to prove not only
that the one who rendered the
assailed decision is wrong but that the
taxpayer is right.



San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
265
Court of Tax Appeals | TAXATION LAW

Proving that the assessment is wrong
is not enough.

Rationale:
A. The tax court could settle nothing and
B. The way is open for subsequent
assessments and appeals. The roots
of controversy must be cut (Siy Po v.
Court of Appeals, G.R.No. L-81446,
Aug. 18, 1988).

Withdrawal of an Appeal Renders the
assailed decision Final and Executory
By withdrawing the appeal, petitioner is
deemed to have accepted the decision of
the CTA. And since the CTA had already
denied taxpayers request for the issuance
of tax credit certificate for insufficiency of
evidence, it may no longer be included in
taxpayers future claims. Petitioner cannot
be allowed to circumvent the denial of its
request for tax credit by abandoning its
appeal and filing a new claim. (Central
Luzon Drug Corp. v. CIR, G.R. No
181371, March 2, 2011)

How motion to suspend collection of
tax is filed: May be filed together with the
petition for review or with the answer, or in
a separate motion filed by the interested
party at any stage of the proceedings
(Sec. 3, Rule 10, RRCTA).

Simultaneous Filing of an Application
for Refund or Credit and Institution of a
Case Before the CTA Allowed
The law fixes the same period of two (2)
years for filing a claim for refund with the
Commissioner and for filing a case with
the CTA. The two-year period for both
starts from the date after the payment of
the tax or penalty, or from the approval of
the application for credit.

Failure to File on Time By Taxpayer
Claiming for Refund to Recover Taxes
Paid Under Protest on the Ground of
Illegality of Assessment No Longer
Available
Where a taxpayer seeking a refund of
taxes whose request is denied and whose
appeal to the CTA was dismissed for
being filed out of time, sues anew to
recover such taxes already paid under
protest, his action is devoid of merit.

For in the same way that the expediency
of an appeal from a denial of a request for
cancellation of warrant of distraint and levy
cannot be utilized to test the legality of an
assessment which has become conclusive
and binding on the taxpayer, so is a claim
for refund not available to revive the right
to contest the validity of an assessment
which had become final for failure to
appeal the same on time. (CIR v.
Concepcion, G.R. No. L-23912, March 15,
1968)

Interlocutory Order of CTA not
Appealable
A CTA resolution denying a taxpayers
motion to declare a warrant of distraint and
levy issued by the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue as illegal is interlocutory
and not appealable (Juan v. CIR, G.R. No.
24740, July 30, 1979).

Distraint of Personal Property and Levy
of Real Property if Decision is
Favorable to the Government (Sec. 13,
R.A. No. 9282)
Upon the issuance of any ruling, order or
decision by the CTA, favorable to the
national government, the CTA shall issue
an order authorizing the BIR, through the
Commissioner:
to seize and distraint any goods,
chattels, or effects and the personal
property, including stocks and other
securities, debts, credits, bank
accounts, and interests in and rights to
personal property; and/or
levy the real property of such persons
in sufficient quantity to satisfy the tax
or charge together with any increment
thereto incident to delinquency.

Note: This remedy is not exclusive and
does not preclude the Court from availing
of other means under the Rules of Court.





RULES OF PROCEDURE
Pursuant to R.A. No. 9282, the decision of the
division of CTA is no longer appealable to the
Court of Appeals but to CTA en banc.

Remedies of the Party Affected by the
Decisions of CTA
1. Any party adversely affected by a ruling,
order or decision of a Division of the CTA
may file a motion for reconsideration or
new trial before the same Division within
15 days from notice
PROCEDURE AFTER DECISION
OF THE CTA



San Beda College of Law
2012 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
266
TAXATION LAW | Court of Tax Appeals
2. Any party adversely affected by a
resolution of a Division of the CTA on a
motion for reconsideration or new trial may
file a petition for review with the CTA en
banc.
3. Any party adversely affected by a decision
or ruling of the CTA en banc may file with
the Supreme Court a verified petition for
review on certiorari pursuant to Rule 45 of
the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure.

Grounds of a motion for new trial
1. Fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable
negligence which ordinary prudence could
not have guarded against and by reason
of which such aggrieved party has
probably been impaired in his rights; or
2. Newly discovered evidence, which he
could not, with reasonable diligence, have
discovered and produced at the trial and
which, if presented, would probably alter
the result (Sec. 5, Rule 15, RRCTA).

Note: Where there is a clear showing of
entitlement to refund, the technical rules may
be waived so as to allow a new trial even if the
requisites or grounds are not met, especially
where the failure to present evidence in the
first instance was adequately explained
(Philippine Phosphate Fertilizer Corp. v. CIR,
G.R. No. 141973 June 28, 2005).

Requisites for motion for new trial based
on newly discovered evidence
1. The evidence was discovered after the
trial;
2. Such evidence could not have been
discovered and produced at the trial with
reasonable diligence;
3. It is material, not merely cumulative,
corroborative or impeaching; and
4. It is of such weight that, if admitted, will
probably change the judgment (Philippine
Phosphate Fertilizer Corp. vs. CIR, supra)

Motion for Reconsideration a Requisite for
a Petition for Review of a Decision of a CTA
Division
Rule 8, Section 1 of the Revised Rules of the
Court of Tax Appeals (RRCTA) require that
the petition for review of a decision or
resolution of the Court in Division must be
preceded by the filing of a timely motion for
reconsideration or new trial with the Division.
The word "must" clearly indicates the
mandatory--not merely directory--nature of a
requirement. (Commissioner of Customs v.
Sales, G.R. No. 183868, November 22, 2010)

No second motion for reconsideration or
new trial
A motion for new trial shall include all grounds
then available and those not included shall be
deemed waived. (omnibus rule)

Thus, no party shall be allowed to file a
second motion for reconsideration of a
decision, final resolution or order or for new
trial.

Modification of CTA decision which has
become final
The general rule is that once a decision
becomes final and executory, it cannot be
altered or modified. However, this rule is not
absolute. In some cases, we held that where
facts or events transpire after a decision has
become executory, which facts constitute a
supervening cause rendering the final
judgment unenforceable, said judgment may
be modified. Also, a final judgment may be
altered when its execution becomes
impossible or unjust.

In the case at bar, parties do not dispute the
fact that after the June 15, 1992 CTA decision
became final and executory, respondents
goods were inexplicably lost while under the
BOCs custody. Certainly, this fact presented a
supervening event warranting the modification
of the CTA decision. Even if the CTA had
maintained its original decision, still petitioner
would have been unable to comply with it for
the obvious reason that there was nothing
more to deliver to respondent. (Republic v.
Unimex Micro Electronics GMBH, G.R. No.
166309-10, March 9, 2007)