Sunday, November 1, 2015

CIR vs. PRIMETOWN PROPERTY, G.R. No. 162155, Case Digest

On March 11, 1999, Primetown Property Group, Inc., through its vice chair, applied for the refund or credit of income tax respondent paid in 1997 due to the slowdown of the real estate industry where respondent suffered losses. With this, it contended that it was not liable for income taxes. Nevertheless, respondent paid its quarterly corporate income tax and remitted creditable withholding tax from real estate sales to the BIR therefore, respondent was entitled to tax refund or tax credit.

On May 13, 1999, revenue officer required respondent to submit additional documents to support its claim.  Respondent complied but its claim was not acted upon. Thus, on April 14, 2000, it filed a petition for review in the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA).

On December 15, 2000, the CTA dismissed the petition as it was filed beyond the two-year prescriptive period for filing a judicial claim for tax refund or tax credit as it found that respondent filed its final adjusted return on April 14, 1998. Thus, its right to claim a refund or credit commenced on that date.

Both Article 13 of the Civil Code and Section 31, Chapter VIII, Book I of the Administrative Code of 1987 deal with the same subject matter the computation of legal periods. Under the Civil Code, a year is equivalent to 365 days whether it be a regular year or a leap year. Under the Administrative Code of 1987, however, a year is composed of 12 calendar months. Needless to state, under the Administrative Code of 1987, the number of days is irrelevant.

There obviously exists a manifest incompatibility in the manner of computing legal periods under the Civil Code and the Administrative Code of 1987. For this reason, we hold that Section 31, Chapter VIII, Book I of the Administrative Code of 1987, being the more recent law, governs the computation of legal periods.

We therefore hold that respondent's petition (filed on April 14, 2000) was filed on the last day of the 24th calendar month from the day respondent filed its final adjusted return. Hence, it was filed within the reglementary period.


No comments:

Great Pacific Life vs. CA

  G.R. No. 113899,  October 13, 1999   FACTS: A contract of group life insurance was executed between petitioner Grepalife) and DBP. G...