DOCTRINES IN TAXATION: Escape from Taxation (Willful Blindness

Doctrine)
People of the Philippines vs. Gloria V. Kintanar On August 31, 2004 the husband of Gloria
C.T.A. EB CRIM. NO. 006
(C.T.A. CRIM. CASE NOS. 0-033 & 0-034) Kintanar filed a protest to the Letter of Demand and
December 3, 2010
Assessment notices sent by the BIR. Photocopies of
NATURE OF THE CASE: A Petition for Review the spouses’ joint income tax returns for the years
of the decision rendered by the Former Second
2000- 2002 were attached to the protest.
Division of the CTA which found Gloria Kintanar guilty
of failure to file her Income Tax returns for years 2000
and 2001. In response thereto, the BIR required the
spouses to submit additional documents within 60
FACTS: Spouses Benjamin Kintanar and Gloria
days. Again, the spouses failed to comply with the said
V. Kintanar were distributors or independent
request; consequently, the assessment and the
contractors of Forever Living Products Phils. Inc.
demand letter became final, executory and
(FLPPI). It all began when the Investigation Division of
demandable.
the BIR received confidential information of an alleged
tax evasion scheme of the Spouses Kintanar. As a The prosecution proved that Gloria Kintanar
result thereof, BIR issued a Letter of Authority to failed to file her ITR’s for the years 1999-2001 and
examine the books of accounts and other accounting found her liable for deficiency income taxes arising
records for taxable years 1999 to 2002. The LOA was from income earned from FLPPI.
received by Mr. Kintanar on April 3, 2003. Gloria
Gloria Kintanar testified that she filed her ITR’s
Kintanar failed to submit the required documents.
for taxable years 2000-2001. She denied having
Thereafter, several notices and a subpoena willfully, unlawfully and feloniously failed to file her
were sent to her, by the BIR but the she remained ITR on said years as she has no personal knowledge of
uncompliant. the actual filing of the said returns because it was her
husband who filed the ITR’s. Her husband on the other
hand testified that he filed the ITR’s for the years

Reported by: Clavel A. Page 1

Tuason
1997-2004 through their hired accountant who Section 255 contemplates four different
prepared and filed their returns. Because he relied situations punishable by law, for failure to:
upon his accountant, he only browsed the returns;
therefore, he has no knowledge to the amount stated 1. To pay any tax;

thereon and to the address which their accountant 2. To make a return;

filed their returns to. 3. To keep any record; and

4. To supply correct and accurate information.
The Former Second Division found Gloria
Kintanar guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Violation of Petitioner Gloria Kintanar is charged with failure

Section 255 of the NIRC of 1997. Hence, Gloria to make or file a return. The elements of which are the

Kintanar filed this instant petition before the CTA En following:

Banc.
a. the accused is a person required to make or
file a return;
ISSUES: Did Petitioner Gloria Kintanar violate
b. the accused failed to make or file a return at
Sec. 255 of the NIRC for failure to make or file her
the time required by law; and
returns? Was her failure to make or file a return
c. That failure to make or file a return was
willful?
willful.
ANSWER/RATIONALE/HELD: Yes, Gloria
All of the aforementioned elements are present
Kintanar is guilty beyond reasonable doubt for failure
in this case.
to make or file a return under Section 255 of the NIRC
.
As to the 1st element, Gloria Kintanar is duty
bound to make or file a return under Section 51 of the
Yes, she the Court found her to have willfully
NIRC. Considering that the she earned a substantial
and deliberately failed to file her returns for the
income as distributor of FLPPI; she is therefore
taxable years 2000-2001.
 DOCTRINES IN TAXATION: Escape from Taxation (Willful Blindness
Doctrine)
required to make or file her annual income tax return and lastly, the signatory of the certificate was not
pursuant to Sec. 51 of the NIRC. presented nor was there an attempt to present him to
attest the veracity of the certificates.
As to 2nd element, she failed to make or file her
ITR’s for the taxable years 2000-2001. Gloria Kintanar As regards the 3rd element of "willfulness", it
had no record that she filed the required ITR’s within was sufficiently proven beyond reasonable doubt
the reglementary period to any of the Rev. District that petitioner deliberately failed to make or file a
Offices of the BIR. The only record the BIR has was return.
when she was registered as a one-time transaction tax
payer for capital gains and documentary stamp in Willful in the tax crimes statutes means
Cavite. The petitioner presented 2 ITR’s allegedly filed voluntary, intentional violation of a known legal duty,
in the RDO of Novaliches. However, the court did not and bad faith or bad purpose need not be shown
give credence to the authenticity of the document as it [Mertens' Law of Federal Income Taxation, Chapter
contained material flaws. The ITR’s were in itself 47.05, page 28, Volume 13, see U.S. v. Green, 757
incomplete, filed in an RDO having no jurisdiction over F2d 116,85-1 USTC 9178 (CA7 1985), in which the

the place of residence of Mrs. Kintanar and even her Court, Citing U.S. v. Moore, 627 F2d 830 (CA7 1980)
husband admitted that he did not even read the and U.S. v. Verkuilen, 690 F2d 6-18, 82-2 USTC 9618
contents of the ITR and does not know where these (CA7 1982), upheld the conviction of a tax
ITR’s were supposedly filed by their accountant. The 2 protester for willful failure to file returns.
certifications submitted by Kintanar were likewise
An act or omission is "willfully" done if done
tainted with various defects to wit; a) the certificates
voluntarily and intentionally and with specific intent
are undated; the certificates were issued by the RDO
to do something the law forbids, or with specific
in Novaliches which has the jurisdiction over the
intent to fail to do something the law requires to be
address reflected on the accused’s ITR. However, the
done; that is, with bad purpose to either disobey or
ITR’s were stamped received by the RDO in Cubao;

Reported by: Clavel A. Page 3

Tuason
disregard the law. A willful act may be described as founded by the Former Second Division, is tantamount
one done intentionally, knowingly and purposely, to "deliberate ignorance” or "conscious avoidance".
without justifiable excuse (Black's Law Dictionary,
51ed. p.1434). Likewise, Gloria Kintanar was duly informed that
no ITRs were filed, nor recorded under her name.
Under the law, Gloria and her husband are There were several notices sent to her by the BIR to
obliged to file their ITRs for taxable years 2000 and comply with her tax obligations, but she opted not to
2001. Thus, Gloria’s sole reliance on her husband to comply. Evidently, such non-compliance with the
file their ITRs is not a valid reason to justify her non- BIR’s notices clearly shows her intent not to file her
filing. Being an experienced businesswoman and ITRs.
having been an independent distributor of FLPPI since
1996, she ought to know and understand all the Finding no reversible error, the Court En Banc

matters concerning her business. This includes affirms the assailed decision and Resolution of the

knowledge and awareness of her tax obligation in Former Second Division of this Court.

connection with her business. She should know

RULING: WHEREFORE, premises considered,
how much are her tax dues, the details stated on
the present Petition for Review is hereby DENIED.
the ITRs, where the same are filed, and other
The assailed Decision dated August 26, 2009 and
important facts related to the filing of her ITRs; after
Resolution dated November 26, 2009 of the Former
all, these matters concern her finances. There were
Second Division are hereby AFFIRMED.
no affirmative acts on the part of Gloria Kintanar to
make sure that her obligation to file her ITRs had been SO ORDERED.
fully complied with. Such neglect or omission, as aptly