Oceanagold, Inc. v. CIR
CTA EB NO. 2343
October 4, 2022
Doctrine:
The submission of the work programs for the
determination of the "date of commencement of commercial
production", as well as proof that the pre-operating expenses
have been duly approved by the Secretary of the DENR, is
required.
Facts:
Petitioner assails the Decision3 dated February 10, 2022, which denied petitioner's appeal of the denial of its claim for refund/ issuance of tax credit certificate (TCC) amounting to Php125,040,087.42 representing excise taxes allegedly erroneously paid by petitioner for the period January to June 2015. In its Motion, petitioner argues that the Court erred in holding that the date of commencement of commercial production cannot be determined and in requiring petitioner to submit pre-operating expenses duly approved by the Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
Issue:
Whether or not the submission of the work programs and proof that the pre-operating expenses have been duly approved by the Secretary of the DENR is required.
Held:
Yes. As reiterated in Oceanagold (Philippines), Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, s this Court already stated that the submission of the work programs for the determination of the "date of commencement of commercial production", as well as proof that the pre-operating expenses have been duly approved by the Secretary of the DENR, is required. In the instant case, no such submissions were made by petitioner, thus, the Court cannot determine if the subject excise taxes were paid during the recovery period or that petitioner is still under recovery. Thus, the claim for refund/issuance ofTCC cannot be granted. The Court will no longer belabor to repeat the relevant portions of the assailed Decision. Petitioner fails to raise any new and substantial arguments, and no cogent reason exists to warrant a reconsideration of the Court's Decision. It would be useless ritual for the Court to reiterate itself.
