This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2007-04-17 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| Jurisprudence, on the other hand, simply required that the assessments contain a computation of tax liabilities, the amount the taxpayer was to pay and a demand for payment within a prescribed period.[26] Everything considered, there was no doubt the October 28, 1988 notices sufficiently met the requirements of a valid assessment under the old law and jurisprudence. | |||||
|
2005-04-26 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The dissenting opinion contends, however, that the tax liability of PNOC constitutes a self-assessed tax, and is, therefore, a delinquent account as of 31 December 1985, qualifying for a compromise under E.O. No. 44. It anchors its argument on the declaration made by this Court in Tupaz v. Ulep,[65] that internal revenue taxes are self-assessing. | |||||