This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2012-03-21 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| On 03 December 2008, the CTA En Banc promulgated a Decision, which reversed and set aside the CTA Second Division on 04 May 2007. The former absolved Petron from any deficiency excise tax liability for taxable years 1995 to 1998. Its ruling in favor of Petron was anchored on this Court's pronouncements in Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Shell),[17] which found that the factual background and legal issues therein were similar to those in the present case. | |||||
|
2012-03-21 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| A transferee in good faith and for value of a TCC who has relied on the Center's representation of the genuineness and validity of the TCC transferred to it may not be legally required to pay again the tax covered by the TCC which has been belatedly declared null and void, that is, after the TCCs have been fully utilized through settlement of internal revenue tax liabilities. Conversely, when the transferee is party to the fraud as when it did not obtain the TCC for value or was a party to or has knowledge of its fraudulent issuance, said transferee is liable for the taxes and for the fraud committed as provided for by law.[52] (Emphasis supplied.) | |||||
|
2010-02-12 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| Meanwhile, on December 21, 2007, this Court rendered judgment in Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue.[22] The BIR assessed deficiency income taxes against Pilipinas Shell, given that it used for payment the fraudulently issued TCCs subject of this case. This Court nullified the assessment, finding that Pilipinas Shell was a transferee in good faith and for value and may thus not be unjustly prejudiced by the transferor's fraud committed in procuring the transfer of those TCCs. | |||||