Facts:
This is an appeal taken by Antonio Albert from the decision of the Court of First Instance of Manila sentencing him to pay the Republic of the Philippines the sum of P6,889.00 as deficiency income tax for the year 1951, with 5% surcharge, and 1% monthly interest thereon from October 16, 1953 until full payment, plus costs.After due trial, the lower court tendered the appealed decision on the ground principally that appellant was already estopped from questioning the assessment which had become final and executory because he did not appeal therefrom to the Court of Tax Appeals.
Issue:
Whether or not Albert was indeed estopped from questioning the deficiency considering that he did not appeal the same to the Court of Tax Appeals
Ruling:
Yes. The facts involved in the present case are very similar to, if not on all fours with those involved in the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. Enrique Magalona, Jr., et al., G.R. No. L-15802, promulgated on September 30, 1960, where we held that upon the facts before the Court, the income tax assessment in question therein was a final assessment of the income tax liability of the Magalonas for the calendar year 1950; that they had 30 days to dispute said assessment by appealing to the Court of Tax Appeals in accordance with the provisions of Section 11, Republic Act No. 1125; that having failed to do so, the assessment became final, executory and demandable.
In the present case, therefore, after receiving the denial of his protest (Exhibit D) against the deficiency tax assessment made against him, appellant should have appealed therefrom within 30 days from June 21, 1955, his failure to do so having caused said assessment to become final, executory and demandable. Therefore, when on February 4, 1957 the action for collection was commenced, appellant was already barred from invoking any defense that would reopen the question of his tax liability on the merits.
This is an appeal taken by Antonio Albert from the decision of the Court of First Instance of Manila sentencing him to pay the Republic of the Philippines the sum of P6,889.00 as deficiency income tax for the year 1951, with 5% surcharge, and 1% monthly interest thereon from October 16, 1953 until full payment, plus costs.After due trial, the lower court tendered the appealed decision on the ground principally that appellant was already estopped from questioning the assessment which had become final and executory because he did not appeal therefrom to the Court of Tax Appeals.
Issue:
Whether or not Albert was indeed estopped from questioning the deficiency considering that he did not appeal the same to the Court of Tax Appeals
Ruling:
Yes. The facts involved in the present case are very similar to, if not on all fours with those involved in the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. Enrique Magalona, Jr., et al., G.R. No. L-15802, promulgated on September 30, 1960, where we held that upon the facts before the Court, the income tax assessment in question therein was a final assessment of the income tax liability of the Magalonas for the calendar year 1950; that they had 30 days to dispute said assessment by appealing to the Court of Tax Appeals in accordance with the provisions of Section 11, Republic Act No. 1125; that having failed to do so, the assessment became final, executory and demandable.
In the present case, therefore, after receiving the denial of his protest (Exhibit D) against the deficiency tax assessment made against him, appellant should have appealed therefrom within 30 days from June 21, 1955, his failure to do so having caused said assessment to become final, executory and demandable. Therefore, when on February 4, 1957 the action for collection was commenced, appellant was already barred from invoking any defense that would reopen the question of his tax liability on the merits.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment