NOTES5FF4

ILDEFONSO O. ELEGADO,
ELEGADO, as Ancillary Administrator of the
Testate Estate of the late WARREN TALOR
GRA!A", #etitioner
$s.
!ON. %O&RT OF TA' A((EALS and %O""ISSIONER OF
INTERNAL RE)EN&E res#ondents.

G.R. No. L*+- "ay /0, /11

%R&2, 3.4

FA%TS4
1. March
March 14,
14, 1976 - WarrWarren
en Taylor
aylor Graham:
Graham:
a. American
American nationa
nationall formerly
formerly resid
resident
ent in the
the Philii
Philiines,
nes,
!. died
died in "r"re#
e#on
on,, $.%.
$.%.A
A
c. left
left certain
certain shares
shares of stoc&
stoc& in the Phili
Philiin
ineses
d. son,
son, Ward ard Graham
Graham,, 'led
'led an estate
estate ta( ret)r
ret)rnn on %etem!
%etem!er er 16, 1976,
1976, *ith the Phi Phili
li
ine
ine +een
+een)e)e
+eresentatie in %an rancisco, $.%.A.
. e!r)a
e!r)aryry 9, 197/
197/ - on the !asis of the ret)rn ret)rn,, the reson
resondent
dent 0ommissi
0ommissioner
oner of nternal
nternal +een)e
+een)e assessed
assessed the
decedent2s estate an estate ta( of P96,39.53.
P96,39.53.
a. This assessm
assessmentent *as roteste
rotested d !y the la* 'rm of )m, o)n# o)n# and
and Wal&er
Wal&er on !ehalf of the estate.
estate. The
The
rotest *as denied !y the 0ommissioner on 8)ly 7, 197/. o f)rther action *as ta&en !y the estate in
)rs)it of that rotest.
5. mea
mean*n*hihile
le;; 8an)
8an)ar
ary
y 1/,
1/, 1977
1977 -the
-the dece
decededent
nt2s
2s *ill
*ill had
had !een
!een admi
admitte
tted
d to ro!
ro!atate
e in the
the 0irc
0irc)i
)itt 0o)r
0o)rtt of 
"re#on Ward Graham.
a. The e(ec)t
e(ec)tor,
or, <l#ado,
<l#ado, etitione
etitioned d for allo*ance
allo*ance of the *ill*ill in the Philiin
Philiines.
es.  this *as allo*ed and he *as


d)!!ed ancillary administrator.

!. he 'led a nd estate ta( ret)rn *= +, 8)ne 4, 19/.
c. 0ommis
0ommissio sione
nerr imosed
imosed an assess
assessmenmentt of P7,94
P7,94/./
/./7
7  rotested !y the A#raa, >)cero and Gineta >a*


"?ce.
4. While
While rotest
rotest *as endin
endin#, #, the 0ommissione
0ommissionerr 'led in the ro!ate ro!ate roceed
roceedin#s
in#s a motion for the allo*anc
allo*ance e of the
!asic
!asic estate
estate ta( of P96,39.53
P96,39.53..    @e said that there *as no ayment yet !)t the assessment *as 'nal and
e(ec)tory.
3. The etition
etitionerer re#arde
re#arded d this motion
motion as an imlied
imlied denial
denial of the rotest
rotest 'led on A)#)st
A)#)st 15, 19/, a#ainst
a#ainst the
second assessment of P7,94/./7. @e then 'led a etition for reie* *= 0TA.
6. The 0ommissio
0ommissioner ner did not immediate
immediately ly ans*er forfor 193 days; and in the end instead cancell cancelled
ed the rotested
rotested
assessment in a letter to the decedent2s estate dated March 51, 19/.
7. This cancell
cancellation
ation *as
*as noti'ed
noti'ed to the 0TA in a motion to dismiss dismiss on the #ro)nd
#ro)nd that the rotest
rotest had !ecome
!ecome moot
and academic.
/. 0TA
0TA  #ranted
#ranted the the motion
motion and
and dismiss
dismissed ed the
the etition.
etition.
9. o*-
o*- et
etit
itio
ionn for
for certiorari )nder +)le 43 of the +)les of 0o)rt.
ISS&E4
 1; *hether the shares of stoc&s left !y the decedent sho)ld !e treated as his e(cl)sie, and not conB)#al, roertyC
; *hether the said stoc&s sho)ld !e assessed as of the time of the o*ner2s death or si( months thereafterC and
5; *hether the aeal 'led *ith the resondent co)rt sho)ld !e considered moot and academic.
!ELD4 1;$nresoled ratio 15;C; )nresoled ratio 15; C5;<% ratio 1-1;
RATIO4
1. n the letter
letter to the deceden
decedent2s t2s estate
estate dated
dated March
March 51,51, 19/,
19/, the 0ommis
0ommissiosione
nerr of nternal
nternal +een
+een)e)e *rote
*rote as
follo*s:
<state of WA++< T. G+A@AM c=o Mr. >D<<%" ". <><GAD" Ancillary Administrator Phile( )ildin# cor. ri(ton E airlane %ts. Pasi#, Metro
Manila
%ir:
 This is *i th re#ard to the estate of the late WA++< TA>"+
TA>"+ G+A@AM, *ho died a resident of "re#on, $.%.A. on March 14, 1976. t aears
that t*o ; letters of demand *ere iss)ed !y this )rea). "ne is for the amo)nt of P96,39.53 !ased on the 'rst ret)rn 'led, and the other
in the amo)nt of P7,94/./7, !ased on the second ret)rn 'led.
t aears that the 'rst assessment of P96,39.53 *as iss)ed on e!r)ary 9, 197/ on the !asis of the estate ta( ret)rn 'led on %etem!er
16, 1976. The said assessment *as, ho*eer, rotested in a letter dated March 7, 197/ !)t *as denied on 8)ly 7, 197/. %ince no aeal *as
made *ithin the re#)latory eriod, the same has !ecome 'nal.
n ie* thereof, it is reF)ested that yo) settle the aforesaid assessment for P96,39.53 *ithin 'fteen 13; days )on receit hereof to the
+eceia!le Acco)nts Diision, this )rea), + ational "?ce )ildin#, Diliman, )eHon 0ity. The assessment for P7,949.37 dated 8)ly 5,
19/, referred to a!oe is here!y cancelled.
Iery tr)ly yo)rs,
%GD.; +$< . A0@<TA Actin# 0ommissioner
. t is o!io)s
o!io)s from the e(ress
e(ress cancella
cancellation
tion of the second
second assessment
assessment for P7,94/
P7,94/./7
./7 that the etitione
etitionerr had !een
deried of a ca)se of action as it *as recisely from this assessment that he *as aealin#.
5. 0TA
0TA said that the etition
etition F)estioni
F)estionin#
n# the assessment
assessment of 8)ly 5, 19/,
19/, *as Jremat)re
Jremat)reJJ since the rotest
rotest to the
assessment had not yet !een resoled. As a matter of fact it had: the said assessment had !een cancelled !y
irt)e of the a!oe-F)oted letter. The resondent co)rt *as on s)rer #ro)nd, ho*eer, *hen it follo*ed *ith the
'ndin#
'ndin# that the said cancellati
cancellation
on had rendered
rendered the etition
etition moot and academic.
academic. There
There *as really no moremore
assessment to reie*.
4. Petitioner ar#)es - that the iss)ance of the second assessment on 8)ly 5, 19/, had the eKect of cancelin# the 'rst
assessment of e!r)ary 9, 197/, and that the s)!seF)ent cancellation of the second assessment did not hae the
eKect of a)tomatically reiin# the 'rst. Moreoer, the 'rst assessment is not !indin# on him !eca)se it *as !ased
on a ret)rn 'led !y forei#n la*yers *ho had no &no*led#e of o)r ta( la*s or access to the 0o)rt of Ta( Aeals.
SC: The petitioner is clutching at straws.
3. t is noted that in the letter of 8)ly 5, 19/, imosin# the second assessment of P7,94/./7, the 0ommissioner
made it clear that Jthe aforesaid amo)nt is considered roisional only !ased on the estate ta( ret)rn 'led s)!Bect
to inesti#ation !y this "?ce for 'nal determination of the correct estate ta( d)e from the estate. Any amo)nt
that may !e fo)nd d)e after said inesti#ation *ill !e assessed and collected later.J
6. t is illo#ical to s)##est that a provisional assessment can s)ersede an earlier assessment *hich had clearly
!ecome 'nal and e(ec)tory.
7. The second contention is no less Limsy. The etitioner cannot !e serio)s *hen he ar#)es that the 'rst assessment
*as inalid !eca)se the forei#n la*yers *ho 'led the ret)rn on *hich it *as !ased *ere not familiar *ith o)r ta(
la*s and roced)re. s the etitioner s)##estin# that they are e(c)sed from comliance there*ith !eca)se of their
i#norance
/. f o)r o*n la*yers and ta(ayers cannot claim a similar reference !eca)se they are not allo*ed to claim a li&e
i#norance, it stands to reason that forei#ners cannot !e any less !o)nd !y o)r o*n la*s in o)r o*n co)ntry. A
more o!io)s and shallo* discrimination than that s)##ested !y the etitioner is indeed di?c)lt to 'nd.
9. )t the most comellin# consideration in this case is the fact that the 'rst assessment is already 'nal and
e(ec)tory and can no lon#er !e F)estioned at this late ho)r.
a. The assessment *as made on e!r)ary 9, 197/. t *as rotested on March 7, 197/. The rotest *as denied on 8)ly 7, 197/. As no
f)rther action *as ta&en thereon !y the decedent2s estate, there is no F)estion that the assessment has !ecome 'nal and
e(ec)tory.
1. n fact, the la* 'rm that had lod#ed the rotest aears to hae acceted its denial.  as sho*n in the letter from the


commissioner. %i#ni'cantly, it has not !een denied !y the etitioner.

11. n ie* of the 'nality of the 'rst assessment, the etitioner cannot no* raise the F)estion of its alidity !efore this
0o)rt any more than he co)ld hae done so !efore the 0TA.
1. What the estate of the decedent sho)ld hae done earlier, follo*in# the denial of its rotest on 8)ly 7, 197/, *as to
aeal to the 0TA *ithin the re#lementary eriod of 5 days after it receied notice of said denial. t *as in s)ch
aeal that the etitioner co)ld then hae raised the 'rst t*o iss)es he no* raises *itho)t !asis in the resent
etition.
15. The F)estion of *hether or not the shares of stoc& left !y the decedent sho)ld !e considered conB)#al roerty or
!elon#in# to him alone is immaterial in these roceedin#s. %o too is the time at *hich the assessment of these
shares of stoc& sho)ld hae !een made !y the +. These F)estions *ere not resoled !y the 0TA !eca)se it had
no B)risdiction to act on the etitioner2s aeal from an assessment that had already !een cancelled. The
assessment !ein# no lon#er controersial or reie*a!le, there *as no B)sti'cation for the resondent co)rt to r)le
on the etition e(cet to dismiss it.
14. f indeed the 0ommissioner of nternal +een)e committed an error in the com)tation of the estate ta(, as the
etitioner insists, that error can no lon#er !e recti'ed !eca)se the ori#inal assessment has lon# !ecome 'nal and
e(ec)tory. f that assessment *as not challen#ed on time and in accordance *ith the rescri!ed roced)re, that
error N for error it *as N *as committed not !y the resondents !)t !y the decedent2s estate itself *hich the
etitioner reresents. %o ho* can he no* comlain.
DIS(OSITI)E4 W@<+<"+<, the etition is D<<D, *ith costs a#ainst the etitioner. t is so ordered,