+- Tax Waze by Bustamante Lozada and Associates (http://www.taxwaze.com)
+-- Forum: Subjects - Highlights and Favorites (http://www.taxwaze.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Taxation (http://www.taxwaze.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: New LOA for New RO/ CTA Case are trial de novo (/showthread.php?tid=435)
New LOA for New RO/ CTA Case are trial de novo - admin - 03-24-2023
Metro Rail vs. CIR
CTA CASE NO. 9651
March 23, 2023
Case at CTA is litigated de novo
Settled is the rule that cases filed before this Court are litigated de novo. As such, parties are expected to litigate and prove every minute aspect of their case anew by presenting, formally offering, and submitting to the CTA all evidence required for the successful prosecution of its claim. The Court may consider and evaluate anew evidence submitted before it and make its own factual determination of the case.
The law creating the CTA specifically provides that proceedings before it shall not be governed strictly by the technical rules of evidence. The paramount consideration remains the ascertainment of truth. Thus, the CT A is not limited by the evidence presented in the administrative claim in the Bureau of Internal Revenue. The claimant may present new/ and additional evidence to the CTA to support its case for tax refund.
In view of the foregoing, respondent's contention that the Court may not rule on defenses not raised at the administrative level has no merit. To stress, the inquiry of this Court is not limited to determining whether the findings of the BIR are consistent with law considering the supporting documents submitted at the administrative level. Rather, jurisprudence has settled that this Court may consider and evaluate anew evidence submitted before it and make its own factual determination of the case.
The assessment is void for lack of authoritv
of the tax agents who conducted
audit examination and performed
assessment functions.
In the case of Medicard Philippines, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the Supreme Court categorically pronounced that an examination of a taxpayer's books and accounting records, to be valid, must be based on a valid LOA, and that the absence of such LOA violates the taxpayer's right to due process thereby rendering the entire assessment void. (G.R. No. 222743,5 April2017).
An LOA is the authority given to the appropriate revenue officer assigned to perform assessment functions. It empowers or enables said revenue officer to examine the books of account and other accounting records of a taxpayer for the purpose of collecting the correct amount of tax. An LOA is premised on the fact that the examination of a taxpayer who has already filed his tax returns is a power that statutorily belongs only to the CIR himself or his duly authorized representatives.
New LOA; New RO
Further, in Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. McDonald's Philippines Realty Corp., (G.R. No. 242670, 10 May 2021) the Supreme Court emphasized that due process requires the identification of tax agents authorized to continue the tax audit or investigation through an LOA.
In the more recent case of Republic of the Philippines v. Robiegie Corporation, (G.R. No. 260261, October 3, 2022) the Supreme Court reiterated the ruling in the Medicard Case and cited the BIR' s own issuance requiring the issuance of a new LOA in case of assignment or transfer of cases to another RO.
Following the foregoing jurisprudential pronouncements, due process requires that the taxpayer should be informed of the names of the tax agents who are duly authorized to conduct examination of the taxpayer's books and accounting records and perform assessment functions through an LOA. It is a jurisdictional requirement of a valid audit and therefore a valid assessment. There has to be a link between the LOA and the tax agents who will conduct an examination of the taxpayer's books of accounts and accounting records.