Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 708 views

    Case Digest 77-79 (Set 3)

    Uploaded by

    Keplot Lirpa
    1) Calamba Steel Center filed an amended corporate income tax return for 1996 declaring a taxable income, tax credits, and tax due. It reported quarterly payments for the second and third quarters of 1995. 2) Calamba Steel contended in the 1997 case that it was entitled to a refund due to income tax withheld by withholding agents in its behalf. Such withholding was not utilized in 1996 due to income losses in the first three quarters of 1996. 3) The Court of Appeals ruled that Calamba Steel was entitled to claim a tax refund even beyond the taxable year following when the tax credit arises, as long as it could prove its entitlement to the refund. Calamba Steel had complied

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case Digest 77-79 (Set 3)

    Uploaded by

    Keplot Lirpa
    708 views3 pages
    1) Calamba Steel Center filed an amended corporate income tax return for 1996 declaring a taxable income, tax credits, and tax due. It reported quarterly payments for the second and third quarters of 1995. 2) Calamba Steel contended in the 1997 case that it was entitled to a refund due to income tax withheld by withholding agents in its behalf. Such withholding was not utilized in 1996 due to income losses in the first three quarters of 1996. 3) The Court of Appeals ruled that Calamba Steel was entitled to claim a tax refund even beyond the taxable year following when the tax credit arises, as long as it could prove its entitlement to the refund. Calamba Steel had complied

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Calamba Steel Center filed an amended corporate income tax return for 1996 declaring a taxable income, tax credits, and tax due. It reported quarterly payments for the second and third quarters of 1995. 2) Calamba Steel contended in the 1997 case that it was entitled to a refund due to income tax withheld by withholding agents in its behalf. Such withholding was not utilized in 1996 due to income losses in the first three quarters of 1996. 3) The Court of Appeals ruled that Calamba Steel was entitled to claim a tax refund even beyond the taxable year following when the tax credit arises, as long as it could prove its entitlement to the refund. Calamba Steel had complied

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    708 views3 pages

    Case Digest 77-79 (Set 3)

    Uploaded by

    Keplot Lirpa
    1) Calamba Steel Center filed an amended corporate income tax return for 1996 declaring a taxable income, tax credits, and tax due. It reported quarterly payments for the second and third quarters of 1995. 2) Calamba Steel contended in the 1997 case that it was entitled to a refund due to income tax withheld by withholding agents in its behalf. Such withholding was not utilized in 1996 due to income losses in the first three quarters of 1996. 3) The Court of Appeals ruled that Calamba Steel was entitled to claim a tax refund even beyond the taxable year following when the tax credit arises, as long as it could prove its entitlement to the refund. Calamba Steel had complied

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    77.) Republic of the Philippines vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No.

    119288 August 18 1997 Facts: Lot 5376 is claimed by Josefa Gacot and Ceferino Sabenicio as co-owner. Before t e earin! of t e case" t e co#rt recei$ed a re%ort from t e Land &e!istration '#t ority callin! its attention of t e decision rendered by J#d!e Garlitos on (ctober )*" +,5* declarin! t e said lot as %ro%erty of t e &e%#blic of t e - ili%%ines. . e claimant %resented erself as well as er son t at s e was in act#al %ossession of t e %ro%erty for more t an 3* years. . e alle!ed co-owner as wai$ed is claim o$er said land. .rial Co#rt r#led in fa$or of Josefa Gacot. . e &e%#blic" t r# t e Solicitor General ele$ated t e case to C'. /t t #s filed a motion to a$e t e case reo%ened and remanded to t e co#rt a 0#o to allow t e &e%#blic to %resent t e decision of J#d!e Garlitos. /t ar!#ed t at t e co#rt a 0#o did not 'c0#ire 1#risdiction o$er t e claim since Josefa did not file er answer wit in t e %eriod fi2ed by &.'. )*6+. 3nfort#nately" t e &e%#blic failed to offer as its e2 ibit t e said order. C' !ranted t e motion. 4#rin! t e re earin!" owe$er" t e &e%#blic failed to %resent t e said order of t e J#d!e in e$idence. /ss#e: 5 et er or not t e re%#blic failed to offer as its e2 ibit t e order of J#d!e Garlitos dated (ctober )*" +,5* #%on re earin! of t e case 6eld: /t is t e r#le t at t e Co#rt s all consider no e$idence w ic as not been formally offered 7&#le +3)" Section 389. &#les of %roced#re and 1#ris%r#dence do not sanction t e !rant of e$identiary $al#e in ordinary trial of e$idence w ic is not formally offered. ' co#rt will ta:e 1#dicial notice of its own acts and records in t e same case" t e facts establis ed in %rior %roceedin!s in t e same case of t e a#t enticity of its own records of anot er case between t e same %arties of t e files of related cases in t e same co#rt of %#blic records on file in t e same co#rt. . e case is remanded to t e .rial Co#rt for f#rt er %roceedin!s for it to ascertain and resol$e t e conflictin! claims of t e %arties.

    78.) !P"#$a%il& 'avings !an( vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 122)8* April 12 2*** Facts: -etitioner in its +,;, /ncome .a2 &et#rn s ows t at it ad a ref#ndable amo#nt of ),7" 8,) incl#si$e of ++)" 8,+. 6owe$er" %etitioner declared in t e same ret#rn t at t e said ref#ndable amo#nt will be a%%lied as ta2 credit to t e s#cceedin! years. /n +,,*" %etitioner claimed for ref#nd in t e amo#nt of ++)"8,+ wit t e C/& alle!in! t at id did not a%%ly t e +,;, ref#ndable amo#nt to its +,,* 'nn#al /ncome ta2 &et#rn d#e to alle!ed losses it inc#rred for t e same year. 3%on %etition to t e C.'" it dismissed said %etition on t e !ro#nd t at %etitioner failed to %resent as e$idence its Cor%orate 'nn#al /ncome .a2 &et#rn for +,,* to establis t e fact claimed by im. C' affirmed C.' r#lin! t at a$in! failed to s#bmit t e re0#irement" t ere<s no basis to !rant t e claim for ref#nd. /ss#e: 5 et er o not C' is correct in affirmin! t e r#lin! of t e C.' 6eld: =o. /n t e first %lace" %etitioner %resented e$idence to %ro$e its claim t at it did not a%%ly t e ref#ndable amo#nt as a ta2 credit. >ore im%ortant" a co%y of t e Final 'd1#stment &et#rn for +,,* was attac ed to %etitioner<s >& filed before t e C.'. . e B/& did not e$en contro$ert t e $eracity of said ret#rn. .r#e" strict %roced#ral r#les !enerally frown #%on s#bmission of t e ret#rn after t e trial. . e law creatin! t e C.'" owe$er" s%ecifically" %ro$ides t at %roceedin! s before it s all not be !o$erned strictly by t e tec nical r#les of e$idence. . e %aramo#nt consideration remains t e ascertainment of tr#t . ?erily" t e 0#est for orderly %resentation of iss#es is not absol#te. /t s o#ld not bar co#rts from considerin! #ndis%#ted facts to arri$e at a 1#st determination of t e contro$ersy.

    79.) Cala%ba 'teel Center "nc. vs. C"R G.R. No. 1+18+7 April 28 2**+ Facts: Calamba Steel" /nc. is a domestic cor%oration en!a!ed in t e man#fact#re of steel blan:s for #se by man#fact#rers of a#tomoti$e" electrical" electronics in ind#strial and o#se old a%%liances. /t filed an amended cor%orate ann#al income ta2 on +,,6 declarin! a net ta2able income of ,.8 million" ta2 credit of 6.7 million and ta2 d#e in t e amo#nt of 3.3 million. /t also re%orted 0#arterly %ayments for t e second and t ird 0#arter of +,,5 in t e amo#nt of ).3 million and +.; million res%ecti$ely. . e %etitioner contended in t e +,,7 case t at it is entitled to a ref#nd w ic was d#e to t e income ta2 wit eld and remitted in its be alf by wit oldin! a!ents. S#c wit eld as indicated in t e +,,7 ret#rn were not #tili@ed in +,,6 d#e to its income loss for t e t ree 0#arters of +,,6. /ss#e: 5 et er or not t e ta2 ref#nd maybe claimed e$en beyond t e ta2able year followin! t e ta2 credit arises 6eld: Aes. B#t t e claimant m#st %ro$e t at it is entitled to ta2 ref#nd. Calamba steel as com%lied owe$er wit t e re0#irements as im%osed by t e =/&C. . e act of t e co#nsel in s#bmittin! t e final ad1#stment after t e trial as been cond#cted was acce%ted by t e co#rt beca#se t e r#les of ordinary %roced#re are a%%lied s#%%letorily. >oreo$er" t e co#rt said t at 1#dicial notice co#ld a$e been ta:en by t e C' and t e C.' of t e +,,6 final ad1#stment ret#rn made by t e Calamba Steel in anot er case %endin! in t e C.'.

    You might also like