Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 6 views

    Reimbursement From Her Co-Administratrix, Florencia Piccio Vda. de Yusay For The Latter'S Corresponding Tax Liability."

    Uploaded by

    Henri Vasquez
    1) The petitioner challenged an assessment for estate and inheritance taxes in the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), which initially ruled in the petitioner's favor. 2) The Supreme Court later reversed the CTA's decision and upheld the tax assessment. 3) When the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) subsequently filed a motion for execution of judgment with the CTA, the petitioner argued it should have been filed with the lower court handling the intestate estate case instead. 4) However, the Supreme Court ruled that the CTA properly took jurisdiction to enforce the Supreme Court's judgment, as the petitioner initiated the original tax review case with the CTA.

    Copyright:

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

    Reimbursement From Her Co-Administratrix, Florencia Piccio Vda. de Yusay For The Latter'S Corresponding Tax Liability."

    Uploaded by

    Henri Vasquez
    6 views1 page
    1) The petitioner challenged an assessment for estate and inheritance taxes in the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), which initially ruled in the petitioner's favor. 2) The Supreme Court later reversed the CTA's decision and upheld the tax assessment. 3) When the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) subsequently filed a motion for execution of judgment with the CTA, the petitioner argued it should have been filed with the lower court handling the intestate estate case instead. 4) However, the Supreme Court ruled that the CTA properly took jurisdiction to enforce the Supreme Court's judgment, as the petitioner initiated the original tax review case with the CTA.

    Original Description:

    sss

    Original Title

    sss

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The petitioner challenged an assessment for estate and inheritance taxes in the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), which initially ruled in the petitioner's favor. 2) The Supreme Court later reversed the CTA's decision and upheld the tax assessment. 3) When the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) subsequently filed a motion for execution of judgment with the CTA, the petitioner argued it should have been filed with the lower court handling the intestate estate case instead. 4) However, the Supreme Court ruled that the CTA properly took jurisdiction to enforce the Supreme Court's judgment, as the petitioner initiated the original tax review case with the CTA.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    6 views1 page

    Reimbursement From Her Co-Administratrix, Florencia Piccio Vda. de Yusay For The Latter'S Corresponding Tax Liability."

    Uploaded by

    Henri Vasquez
    1) The petitioner challenged an assessment for estate and inheritance taxes in the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), which initially ruled in the petitioner's favor. 2) The Supreme Court later reversed the CTA's decision and upheld the tax assessment. 3) When the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (CIR) subsequently filed a motion for execution of judgment with the CTA, the petitioner argued it should have been filed with the lower court handling the intestate estate case instead. 4) However, the Supreme Court ruled that the CTA properly took jurisdiction to enforce the Supreme Court's judgment, as the petitioner initiated the original tax review case with the CTA.

    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 1

    LILIA YUSAY GONZALES, as Judicial Co-Administratrix of the Intestate Estate HELD: NO. NO GAOD.

    NO GAOD. CTA acquired jurisdiction to review the assessment of


    of the late MATIAS YUSAY vs. THE COURT OF TAX APPEALS (CTA) and CIR respondent CIR when petitioner, herself, initiated the CTA Case.

    In 1980, petitioner filed before the CTA a petition for review of the CTA rendered a decision favorable to petitioner which CIR appealed to this
    assessment of CIR of the estate and inheritance taxes of the estate of the late Court. The decision of this Court reversed and set aside the decision of the
    Matias Yusay on the ground for prescription. After hearing, CTA rendered CTA and entered a new one affirming the assessment of the CIR.
    judgement holding that the assesment had prescribed, and reversing the
    It is crystal clear, therefore, that what is ordered executed by CTA is the
    decision of the CIR. Upon appeal to the SC, the CIR decision was upheld and
    judgment of this Court in G.R. No. L-19495. It is but proper that when the
    CTA decision reversed.
    record of the CTA Case was returned to CTA, it must in a ministerial manner
    “intestate estate of Matias Yusay is hereby ordered to pay the sum of enforce the judgment as rendered by this Court 'm G.R. No. L-19495. Under
    P16,246.04 and P39,178.12 as estate and inheritance taxes, taxes Section 8 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, the writ of execution must issue in
    respectively, plus interest and surcharge -for delinquency in accordance the name of the Republic of the Philippines from the court in which the
    with Section 101 of the National Revenue, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO judgment or order is entered.
    REIMBURSEMENT FROM HER CO-ADMINISTRATRIX, FLORENCIA PICCIO
    VDA. DE YUSAY FOR THE LATTER'S CORRESPONDING TAX LIABILITY.” When this Court ordered "petitioner Lilia Yusay Gonzales in G.R. No. L-
    19495 to pay the estate and inheritance taxes without prejudice to
    Petitioner filed an MR praying that the decision be amended so that the
    reimbursement from her administratrix Florencia P. Vda. de Yusay, for the
    liability for the estate and inheritance taxes to be paid be alloted as 1/3 to to
    latter's corresponding tax liability, it did so, realizing that the properties of
    petitioner and 2/3 to administratrix Florencia P. Vda. de Yusay.
    the estate have already- been distributed to the heirs (1/3 to petitioner and
    However, SC ruled that when petitioner represented her co-administratrix 2/3 to Florencia P. Vda. de Yusay) as the amended project of partition in the
    and the whole estate of Matias Yusay in the CTA Case, she risked being intestate case was affirmed by this Court in G.R. No. L-11378.
    ordered to pay the whole assessment, should the assessment be sustained.
    Petitioner, herself, filed a motion to declare Special Proceedings No. 459 in
    Petitioner was estopped from denying liability for the whole tax. As the Court of First Instance of Iloilo, regarding the intestate estate of Matias
    administratrix, petitioner is liable for the entire inheritance tax although her Yusay, closed.
    liability would not exceed the amount of her share in the estate. The entire
    This Court in the resolution dated April 24, 1967, in G.R. No. L-19495, declared
    inheritance tax which amounts to P39,178.12 excluding penalties is obviously
    that petitioner is liable personally for the taxes imposed limited only by the
    much less than her distributive share.
    value of the properties she received from the estate.
    When it became final, respondent CIR filed a Motion for Execution before
    For Us now to rule that the proper procedure would be for the decision of
    CTA. Petitioner filed an opposition, contending that it should be the CFI of
    this Court in G.R. No. L-19495 to be filed in Special Proceedings No. 459 of the
    Iloilo before which Special Proceedings (Intestate Estate of the late Matias
    Court of First Instance of Iloilo as a money claim is not only too late, but also
    Yusay) was pending that should enforce the decision, and not the Court of
    impractical circuitous, and a cumbersome procedure that would lead to
    Tax Appeals. But still, CTA granted the writ of execution.
    further delay in the enforcement of the judgment in this case which is for
    ISSUE: WON CTA committed a grave abuse of discretion tantamount to lack tax liability.
    of jurisdiction when it ordered the execution of the decision of this Court in
    We cannot ignore that there has been a delay of about 29 years in the
    G.R. No. L-19495.
    payment of these taxes.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy