Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cta 2D CV 06681 D 2006aug31 Ref PDF
Cta 2D CV 06681 D 2006aug31 Ref PDF
SECOND DIVISION
Promulgated:
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE,
Respondent.
AU 3 1 2006
X ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ X
DECISION
PALANCA-ENRIQUEZ, J.:
For a judicial claim for tax credit to prosper, the taxpayer must
that fulfills the intent of the law not only with respect to the proper
on zero-rated transactions, but also to prevent the claim for tax credit of
~
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 2
DECISION
therefore be enforced.
THE CASE
THE FACTS
defenses, averred:
memoranda, within thirty (30) days from notice. Considering that only
petitioner filed its Memorandum on May 2, 2006, the case was deemed
ISSUES
As stipulated upon by the parties, the following are the issues for
II
III
IV
v
WHETHER THE INPUT TAXES VAT SUBJECT OF THE
CLAIM FOR TAX CREDIT CERTIFICATE WERE NOT
UTILIZED IN THE SUCCEEDING QUARTERS.
and accounted for in accordance with the rules and regulations of the
in the Philippines to MOP and MSLI qualify as zero-rated sales for VAT
which provides:
No. 7-95 (!'he Consolidated Value-Added Tax Regulations) clarifies Section 108
services for the taxable year 2001. Allegedly, these input VAT have not
~
Tax.-
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 8
DECISION
Principal Issue
precedence over the others since a negative ruling to such effect renders
Invoicing Requirements
Sections 113 and 237 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, lay down
~
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 9
DECISION
Regulations No. 7-95 enumerates the information that must appear on the
face of receipts or invoices issued for the sale of goods by all VAT-
The law is very clear and concise. Section 113 provides that "a
VAT registered person shall, for every sale, issue a duly registered VAT
word "VAT", the BIR Authority imprint or BIR permit marker and the
sale.
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 12
DECISION
the invoicing requirements laid down in the said provisions of the NIRC
Court finds that petitioner's official receipts (Exhibits "CC " to "ZZ ") do not
2003 [Clarifying Certain Issues Raised Relative to the Processing of Claims for
Value-Added Tax (VAl) Credit/Refund, Including Those Filed with the Tax and
(/JI//
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 13
DECISION
Revenue Group, One-Stop Shop Inter-Agency Tax Credit and Duty Drawback Center,
and unequivocal words that the failure of a taxpayer claiming for tax
disallowance of the claim for input tax. The pertinent portion of said
rated sales by the taxpayer, but fails to comply with the mvmcmg
~
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 14
DECISION
or receipts, the claim for tax credit/refund of VAT on its sales shall be
xxx". VAT invoices and receipts, in relation to the instant case, are used
there is a danger that the purchaser of the goods or services may be able
to claim the input tax on the sale to it by the taxpayer of the goods or
services, as the case may be, notwithstanding the fact that no VAT was
(r~
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 15
DECISION
under the regulations. Otherwise, there may result the absurd situation
indicate the word "zero-rated" on its official receipts is fatal to its claim.
strictissimi juris against the taxpayer and liberally in favor of the taxing
authority. It is worthy to emphasize that a claim for tax refunds are in the
sovereign authority and are strictly construed against the person or entity
claiming it. Taxation is the rule and exemption is the exception. The law
does not look with favor tax exemptions and he who thus seek to be
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 16
DECISION
privileged must justify it by words too plain too be mistaken and too
other issues raised in this petition for being moot and academic.
merit.
SO ORDERED.
L~~~~
OLGA. PALANCA~NRIQUEZ
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
g~~e . ~~~ ~
JUANITO c. CASTANEDK, ffR..
Associate Justice
E~.UY
Associate Justice
ATTESTATION
I attest that the conclusions in the above Decision were reached in
consultation before the cases were assigned to the writer of the opinion of
the Court's Division.
<2~~~ C. at1'~::cto Q
ci.JUANITO C. CASTANED/Q, JR.
Associate Justice
Chairman, Second Division
C.T.A CASE NO. 6681 17
DECISION
CERTIFICATION
LL.c.~
ERNESTO D. ACOSTA
Presiding Justice