CTA junks tax refund for P117.9-M sought by Green Cross, Inc.
The Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) has denied for lack of merit the petition of Green Cross, Inc. which sought the refund of P117.9 million in alleged erronously paid taxes to the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR).
From Nov. 16, 2018 to Dec. 17, 2019, Green Cross paid excise taxes amounting to P106,337,067.99 on the removal of its cologne products/splash colognes from their place of production.
The firm also paid value-added taxes (VAT) on the excise taxes amounting to P11,636,439.79 from 2018 to 2019.
It then filed an adminstrative claim for refund with the BIR's Large Taxpayers Service in a letter dated Oct. 29, 2020 in the amount of P117,973,507.78.
When the BIR did not act on its claim, Green Cross filed with the CTA a petition for review on Nov. 16, 2020.
The CTA's second division denied the petition after trial. When its motion for reconsideration was also denied, Green Cross appealed its case to the CTA as a full court on May 8, 2024.
Green Cross argued that the change in the type of tax imposed on "toilet waters" from percentage tax to excise tax did not result in the abandonment of the definition provided under Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 8-84, which was issued to implement sales or percentage tax on cosmetic products as imposed under Section 194(b) of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) of 1977.
It added that the absence of a new revenue regulation by the Secretary of Finance when the tax imposition on "toilet waters" shifted from percentage tax to excise tax indicates that the government intended the definition of "toilet waters" under RR No. 8-84 to remain in effect.
However, the CTA en banc (full court) found its review "unmeritorious" and said that the definition of "toilet waters" under RR No. 8-84 cannot be invoked by Green Cross to support its claim for refund.
"Since Section 194 of the NIRC of 1977, which gave life to RR No. 8-84, has been substantially amended and replaced by Section 150 of the NIRC of 1997, as amended, it logically follows that RR No. 8-84, which relied on the former provision, is now deemed inapplicable. With the repeal of the law it was intended to implement, there is nothing for RR No. 8-84 to enforce," the CTA explained.
Green Cross likewise argued that its splash cologne products are not considered "non-essential goods," as the latter's definition under House Bill No. 6993 states that these are goods "whose prices are beyond the reach of the bulk of consumers, and which are not significant or important inputs to other value-adding industries."
But the CTA begged to differ as the term "non-essential goods," as commonly understood, refers to the functionality of the products rather than their market value.
The CTA ruled: "Wherefore, premises considered, the present Petition for Review filed by petitioner Green Cross, Inc. is hereby denied for lack of merit. The Decision dated Nov. 22, 2023 and the Resolution dated April 16, 2024, rendered by the Court's Special Second Division in CTA Case No. 10401 are affirmed. So ordered."
The 22-page decision was written by Presiding Justice Roman G. Del Rosario with the concurrence of Associate Justices Ma. Belen M. Ringpis-Liban, Catherine T. Manahan, Jean Marie A. Bacorro-Villena, Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro, Marian Ivy F. Reyes-Fajardo, Lanee S. Cui-David, Corazon G. Ferrer-Flores, and Henry S. Angeles.