FACTS: On 09
June 2004, respondent received a copy of the Final Assessment Notice dated 17
March 2004 issued by petitioner notifying the former of its internal revenue
tax liabilities for the year 1995. Respondent filed a protest to the said
notice pleading prescription. In its Answer, petitioner claimed that its right
to assess had not yet prescribed because the 1995 income tax return filed by
respondent was false and fraudulent for its alleged intentional failure to
reflect its true sales.
ISSUE: Whether
or not fraud may be presumed.
HELD: No. The
prescriptive period in making an assessment depends upon whether a tax return
was filed or whether the tax return filed was either false or fraudulent. When
a tax return that is neither false or fraudulent has been filed, the BIR may
assess within three years, reckoned from the date of actual filing or from the
last day prescribed by law for filing. However, in case of a false or
fraudulent return with intent to evade tax, it may assess at anytime within ten
years after the discovery of the falsity, fraud or omission.
Fraud is a question of fact that should be alleged and
proven. The willful neglect to file the required tax return or the fraudulent
intent to evade the payment of taxes, considering the same is accompanied by
legal consequences, cannot be presumed. Fraud entails corresponding sanctions
under the tax law. Therefore, it is indispensable for the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue to include the basis for its allegations of fraud in the
assessment notice.
Comments
Post a Comment