Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 109 views

    Republic v. Lim de Yu: DOCTRINE/S: For The Ten-Year Period of

    Uploaded by

    DaLe Aparejado
    This case involves the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) assessing deficiency income tax payments for Rita Lim de Yu for the years 1948 to 1953. [1] BIR alleges Yu's tax returns for these years were fraudulent because the reported incomes were much lower than BIR's computations. [2] However, the court found that while fraud was alleged, it was not proven. [3] Therefore, the five-year limitation period for tax assessment under the law at the time applied, and the right to assess the 1948-1950 taxes had prescribed by the time BIR issued its deficiency notice in 1956.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Republic v. Lim de Yu: DOCTRINE/S: For The Ten-Year Period of

    Uploaded by

    DaLe Aparejado
    109 views3 pages
    This case involves the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) assessing deficiency income tax payments for Rita Lim de Yu for the years 1948 to 1953. [1] BIR alleges Yu's tax returns for these years were fraudulent because the reported incomes were much lower than BIR's computations. [2] However, the court found that while fraud was alleged, it was not proven. [3] Therefore, the five-year limitation period for tax assessment under the law at the time applied, and the right to assess the 1948-1950 taxes had prescribed by the time BIR issued its deficiency notice in 1956.

    Original Title

    20. Republic v. Lim de Yu

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) assessing deficiency income tax payments for Rita Lim de Yu for the years 1948 to 1953. [1] BIR alleges Yu's tax returns for these years were fraudulent because the reported incomes were much lower than BIR's computations. [2] However, the court found that while fraud was alleged, it was not proven. [3] Therefore, the five-year limitation period for tax assessment under the law at the time applied, and the right to assess the 1948-1950 taxes had prescribed by the time BIR issued its deficiency notice in 1956.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    109 views3 pages

    Republic v. Lim de Yu: DOCTRINE/S: For The Ten-Year Period of

    Uploaded by

    DaLe Aparejado
    This case involves the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) assessing deficiency income tax payments for Rita Lim de Yu for the years 1948 to 1953. [1] BIR alleges Yu's tax returns for these years were fraudulent because the reported incomes were much lower than BIR's computations. [2] However, the court found that while fraud was alleged, it was not proven. [3] Therefore, the five-year limitation period for tax assessment under the law at the time applied, and the right to assess the 1948-1950 taxes had prescribed by the time BIR issued its deficiency notice in 1956.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    Digest for Tax 2

    Appeals, which forwarded the case to this


    20. Republic v. Lim de Yu Court.

    DOCTRINE/S: For the ten-year period of BIR maintains that returns filed by Yu for
    limitation of assessment and collection of the years 1948 to 1953 are false and
    fraudulent because the yearly net incomes
    taxes under Section 332 of the Tax Code to
    reported in her returns are much less than as
    apply it is not enough that fraud is alleged computed by the Bureau
    in the complaint; it must be established.
    Fraud not having been proven in the case at
    bar, the period of limitation was five years ISSUE/S: Whether or not the returns filed
    from the filing of the return, according to by appellee for the years 1948 to 1953 are
    Section 331 of the tax code. false and fraudulent

    FACTS: RULING:

    Appellee Rita Lim de Yu filed her yearly No. While fraud is alleged in the complaint,
    income tax returns from 1948 through 1953.
    the same has not been established.
    BIR assessed the taxes due on each return,
    and appellee paid them accordingly. On July For the ten-year period of limitation of
    17, 1956 the Bureau issued to appellee assessment and collection of taxes under
    deficiency income tax assessments for the Section 332 of the Tax Code to apply it is
    years 1945 to 1953 in the total amount of not enough that fraud is alleged in the
    P22,450.50. complaint; it must be established. Fraud not
    having been proven in the case at bar, the
    She protested the assessments and requested
    a reinvestigation. On August 30, 1956 she period of limitation was five years from the
    signed a "waiver" of the statute of filing of the return, according to Section 331
    limitations under the Tax Code as condition of the tax code. The right to assess or collect
    to the reinvestigation requested. the income taxes for the years 1948 to 1950
    had already prescribed, therefore, when the
    Thereafter, or on July 18, 1958, the Bureau Bureau of Internal Revenue issued the
    issued to her income tax assessment notices
    deficiency income tax assessments on July
    for the years 1948 to 1953 totalling
    P35,379.63. This last assessment, like the 17, 1956.
    one issued in 1956, covered not only the
    basic deficiency income taxes, but also 50% Relevant provisions:
    thereof as surcharge.
    Sections 331 and 332 of the [OLD] Tax
    Upon appellee's failure to pay, an action for
    Code provide: (Note: This is a 1964 case)
    collection was filed against her in the Court
    of First Instance of Cotabato on May 11,
    1959. After trial the suit was dismissed, and SEC. 331. Period of limitation upon
    the Government appealed to the Court of assessment and collection. — Except as

    Page 1 of 3
    Digest for Tax 2

    provided in the succeeding section, internal


    revenue taxes shall be assessed within five
    years after the return was filed, and no
    proceeding in court without assessment for
    the collection of such taxes shall be begun
    after the expiration of such period. For the
    purposes of this section a return filed before
    the last day prescribed by law for the filing
    thereof shall be considered as filed on such
    last day: Provided, That this limitation shall
    not apply to cases already investigated prior
    to the approval of this Code.
    [NOTE: It is now Sec. 203 of NIRC, within
    3 years na lang]

    SEC. 332. Exceptions as to period of


    limitation of assessment and collection of
    taxes. — (a) In the case of a false or
    fraudulent return with intent to evade tax or
    of a failure to file a return, the tax may be
    assessed, or a proceeding in court for the
    collection of such tax may be begun without
    assessment, at any time within ten years
    after the discovery of the falsity fraud, or
    omission.
    [NOTE: It is now Sec. 222 under NIRC,
    same na 10 years]

    Page 2 of 3
    Digest for Tax 2

    Page 3 of 3

    You might also like