Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
in view of the foregoing, Pilipinas Total Gas is not the proper basis to construe that all subsequent verbal communications made by the BIR to Zuellig-PH (or any taxpayer for that matter) are insufficient for the purpose of determining the reckoning point of the 120-day period. In this case, records show that Zuellig-PH duly complied with the BIR officials' written and verbal requests for additional documents through its letters dated July 5, 2011, [54] May 8, 2012, [55] July 25, 2012, [56] Dece…
accordingly, file its judicial claim for refund, as was done by the taxpayer in Pilipinas Total Gas . To this end, the Court had summarized its disposition as follows: To summarize, for the just disposition of the subject controversy, the rule is that from the date an administrative claim for excess unutilized VAT is filed, a taxpayer has thirty (30) days within which to submit the documentary requirements sufficient to support his claim, unless given further extension by the CIR. Then, upon filing by the taxpayer of his complete documents to support his application, or expiration of the period given, the CIR has 120 days within which to decide the claim for tax credit or refund. Should the taxpayer, on the date of his filing, manifest that he no longer wishes to submit any other addition documents to complete his administrative claim, the 120-day period allowed to the CIR begins to run from the date of filing. [53] Unlike in this case, the Court in Pilipinas Total Gas was not confronted with the issue of whether or not requests for documents should be in any particular form, for the purpose of determining the reckoning point of the 120-day period. In fact, as earlier mentioned, in Pilipinas Total Gas , there was no request - whether verbal or written - given by the BIR to the taxpayer. Thus, in view of the foregoing, Pilipinas Total Gas is not the proper basis to construe that all subsequent verbal communications made by the BIR to Zuellig-PH (or any taxpayer for that matter) are insufficient for the purpose of determining the reckoning point of the 120-day period. In this case, records show that Zuellig-PH duly complied with the BIR officials' written and verbal requests for additional documents through its letters dated July 5, 2011, [54] May 8, 2012, [55] July 25, 2012, [56] December 6, 2012, [57] September 11, 2013, [58] and April 29, 2014, [59] with the last letter indicating that it had " already submitted the complete documents in support of [its] application for refund of excess and unutilized input VAT for the four (4) quarters of TY 2010 in the amount of Php39,931,971.21 ." [60] Notably, all of these verbal requests for additional documents and Zuellig-PH's corresponding submissions in response thereto were well-documented and all confirmed by the BIR ; hence, there is no danger of losing track of when to reckon the 120-day period. As held in Pilipinas Total Gas , it is the taxpayer who ultimately determines when complete documents have been submitted for the purpose of commencing and continuing the running of the 120-day period. As herein applied, the 120-day period should therefore be reckoned from the April 29, 2014 letter of Zuellig-PH wherein it stated that it had already submitted the complete documents in support of its refund claim. In turn, the BIR had 120 days from such time (or until August 27, 2014) to act on Zuellig-PH's administrative claim for refund. Since it was established that the BIR failed to act within such period
G.R. Nos. 255470-71 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, VS. CARGILL PHILIPPINES, INC..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. Nos. 255470-71 -
CaseG.R. No. 175142 - BONIFACIO WATER CORPORATION (FORMERLY BONIFACIO VIVENDI WATER CORPORATION), VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 175142 -