RCBC vs.

CIR

FACTS:
On July 5, 2001,(CIR) issued a (FAN) to (RCBC) demanding a total tax liability of about P100
million.

On July 20, 2001 (within the 30 day period from issuance of FAN to file a protest), RCBC filed
a protest.
The CIR never acted on the protest.

On April 30, 2002, RCBC filed an appeal with the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA).

ISSUE: Whether or not RCBC filed a timely appeal.

HELD : No.
Under the law, after the lapse of 180 days within which the CIR is supposed to rule on the
protest yet the CIR did not, the taxpayer has 30 days from said lapse to file an appeal with
the CTA.
In the case at bar, the protest was filed on July 20, 2001.
From that date, RCBC had until September 18, 2001 (60 days) to submit supporting
documents. There was no showing that RCBC submitted any such documents.

But assuming it submitted said documents on September 18, 2001, the 180 day period for the
CIR to decide shall commence on that date hence the 180 day period has lapsed on March 17,
2002.
Thereafter, RCBC has 30 days to appeal the inaction of the CIR (30 days from the lapse of the
180 day period) or until April 16, 2002. RCBC filed its appeal on April 30, 2002 which was
already beyond the 30 day period.

In such case, the decision of the CIR indirectly denying the protest by reason of inaction is
already final and executory and is no longer appealable.
CIR vs. First Express Pawnshop Company.

Facts:
CIR issued assessment notices against Respondent for deficiency income tax, VAT and
documentary stamp tax on deposit on subscription and on pawn tickets. Respondent filed its
written protest on the assessments. When CIR did not act on the protest during the 180-day
period, respondent filed a petition before the CTA.

Issue:
Has Respondents right to dispute the assessment in the CTA prescribed?

Held:
NO. The assessment against Respondent has not become final and unappealable. It cannot be
said that respondent failed to submit relevant supporting documents that would render the
assessment final because when respondent submitted its protest, respondent attached all
the documents it felt were necessary to support its claim. Further, CIR cannot insist on the
submission of proof of DST payment because such document does not exist as respondent claims
that it is not liable to pay, and has not paid, the DST on the deposit on subscription.

The term "relevant supporting documents" are those documents necessary to support the legal
basis in disputing a tax assessment as determined by the taxpayer. The BIR can only inform the
taxpayer to submit additional documents and cannot demand what type of supporting documents
should be submitted. Otherwise, a taxpayer will be at the mercy of the BIR, which may require
the production of documents that a taxpayer cannot submit. Since the taxpayer is deemed to have
submitted all supporting documents at the time of filing of its protest, the 180-day period
likewise started to run on that same date.