Civil remedies

Section 276 effect

Bank- has to intervene in case of service of writ of garnishment; an exception to general
rule in the rules of court.

Is it a violation on secrecy law if bir asks for the issuance of writ of garnishment on the
bank accounts? NO. what is prohibited is examination before inquiry. It merely freezes
the account of the taxpayer.

Claim for refund/credit

1. excess input VAT (sec. 112A & Sec 112C)
Aichi Case:
Where to reckon the 2 year prescriptive period?
-2 years from the close of the taxable quarter where the relevant sales were
made.

Does the 2 year prescriptive period apply to both administrative claim and the
judicial claim for refund?
Only to administrative claim, to be filed with the CIR.

120-30 day rule section 112 (D)

- mandatory and jurisdictional. IF filed earlier, it is considered premature and shall
be dismissed.

2. erroneously or illegally collected taxes (Sec. 204C & Sec. 229)

2 year period reckoned from the time the payment is made

PER CTA RULE: if claim denied, appeal within 30 days from receipt of denial to the CTA

Will the 120-30 day rule apply? NO.

Under 229 (2), Both the admin claim and the judicial claim/appeal must be filed within 2
year prescriptive period. In other words, appeal must be made before the expiration of
the 2 yr prescriptive period unlike the 1st kind of refund.

Sec. 229 (2)regardless of any supervening cause which may arise after the payment
- VERY IMPORTANT VIS LOCAL GOVERNMENT TAXATION-

If the BIR does not act on the claim within the 2 yr period, the taxpayer may appeal to
the CTA. He may attach a supplemental petition on the late receipt of the denial.

WHO MAY CLAIM FOR REFUND

Case of silkair the person statutorily liable, not the person to whom the burden is shifted.
As per the treaty, it is only exempt from direct taxes. Hence, he can be held liable for
excise tax.
Case of PAL SC granted the refund of PAL because there is a law expressly exempting
PAL. Sec. 13 of PD 938(charter of PAL) exempts PAL from all direct and indirect tax.
Pascor case assessment not required before tax evasion case may be filed.

Research in Gloria kintanar case 1st tax evasion case decided; Doctrine of Willfull
blindness.

Total Gas case the reckoning point if additional supporting documents are given is
1st issue: Who determines as to the completion of the documents? It is the TAXPAYER, if
for him the documents are already complete. The bir, may however, deny the same if for
them it is not complete.
- there must be a cut-off date as issued by the BIR for the submission of the additional
documents, June 11, 2014. (RMC 54-2014)
2nd issue: if incomplete documents in administrative level, will its submission in the judicial
level cure the defect? YES. There was No express denial of the documents, there was
denial by inaction at the BIR level. It would have been different if there was denial due to
insufficiency of evidence.
Trial de novo- you need to offer evidence in CTA, to start from the beginning of the trial.
Unlike appeals in the CA.

CBK case 2nd type of refund. CBK is correct, they should have filed the judicial claim for
refund within the 2 r prescriptive period. Otherwise, they will lose their right to claim.
Sps. Manly Case net worth investigation/expenditure method

1. Surcharge 25%; 50%

2. Interest -20% per year
3. Compromise/penalty

Case of Takenaka deficiency vs delinquency

NO injunction rule section 218

Irrevocability rule Section 76

If taxpayer fails to select either to carry over, claim for refund or TCC, presumption is
CARRY-over.