Latest Posts

Wednesday, December 06, 2017

Wildfires ravaged high-end residences in Los Angeles

Some of the exclusive neighborhoods near Bel Air in Los Angeles were devastated by wildfires recently.

It ruined 450 acres and focused mostly in places where the luxury residences of Hollywood actors and actresses are located.

Mayor Eric Garcetti informed the media that the plan of the city is to stop the fire before it becomes bigger. Now, 700 families have been evacuated. Based on the report of the fire department, four homes were left desolated and eleven were damaged.

The fire started in Sepulveda Pass. San Diego I-405 Freeway has been temp0rarily closed because of the blaze.

RCBC vs CIR Case Digest

FACTS: RCBC assails the validity of the waivers of the statute of limitations on the ground that the said waivers failed to indicate acceptance or agreement of the CIR as required under Section 223(b) of the 1997 Tax Code. RCBC further argues that the principle of estoppel cannot be applied against it because its payment of the other tax assessments does not signify a clear intention on its part to give up its right to question the validity of the waivers. Is RCBC correct?

HELD: Under Article 1431 of the Civil Code, the doctrine of estoppel is anchored on the rule that “an admission or representation is rendered conclusive upon the person making it, and cannot be denied or disproved as against the person relying thereon.” A party is precluded from denying his own acts, admissions or representations to the prejudice of the other party in order to prevent fraud and falsehood.

Estoppel is clearly applicable in this case. RCBC, through its partial payment of the revised assessments, issued within the extended period as provided for in the questioned waivers, impliedly admitted the validity of those waivers. Had petitioner truly believed that the waivers were invalid and that the assessments were issued beyond the prescriptive period, then it should not have paid the reduced amount of taxes in the revised assessment. Thus, RCBC is estopped from questioning the validity of the waivers. (Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation vs Commissioner of Internal Revenue, GR 170257, September 7, 2011)


Monday, December 04, 2017

Taganito Mining Corporation vs CIR Case Digest

FACTS: The CTA denied the claim for refund by Taganito on its input VAT on importation of capital goods for failure of the latter to substantiate its claim. However, Taganito insists that the official receipts issued by the bank authorized to collect import duties and taxes are the best evidence to prove its payment of the input tax being claimed. It also points to the report of the independent CPA which allegedly reviewed the IEIRDs and subsidiary ledger containing the description of the dump trucks. Is Taganito’s claim tenable?

HELD: NO. IEIRD is required to properly substantiate the payment of the duties and taxes on imported goods.

Moreover, even assuming that the importations were duly substantiated, Taganito’s claim still would not prosper because it failed to present evidence to show that it properly amortized the related input VAT over the estimated useful life of the capital goods in its subsidiary ledger, as required by the Revenue Regulation 16-05. This is made apparent by the fact that Taganito’s claim for refund is for the full amount of the input VAT on the importation, rather than for an amortized amount, and by its failure to present its subsidiary ledger. (Taganito Mining Corporation vs Commissioner of Internal Revenue, GR No. 201195, November 26, 2014)