June 2012 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[G.R. No. 175016 : June 13, 2012]
BANCO DE ORO UNIVERSAL BANK v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
G.R. No. 175016 (Banco De Oro Universal Bank v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue)
RESOLUTION
After a careful examination of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition for failure to show that the Court of Tax Appeals erred in holding that petitioner's Investment Savings Account ("ISA") is a certificate of deposit subject to documentary stamp tax (DST) under Section 180 (now Section 179) of the Tax Code.
The Court has previously held that a passbook representing an interest earning deposit account issued by a bank qualifies as a certificate of deposit drawing interest.[1] Moreover, the subject ISAs are deposits with fixed term since a withdrawal before its expiration will result in the reduction of the interest rate, which is an essential feature of a time deposit subject to DST.[2] Lastly, the findings and conclusions reached by the CTA, an expert in handling tax problems, should be given great respect and shall not be disturbed unless there is a grave abuse of discretion, which has not been shown in this case.[3] (Peralta, J., Acting Chairperson, per Special Order No. 1228 dated June 6, 2012; Villarama, Jr., J., Acting Member, in lieu of Justice Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., per Special Order No. 1229 dated June 6, 2012.)cralaw
SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUCITA ABJELINA-SORIANO
Division Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] China Banking Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 172359, October 2, 2009, 602 SCRA 316, 332.[2] International Exchange Bank v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 171266, April 4, 2007, 696 SCRA 688, 699.
[3] Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Citytrust Banking Corporation, G.R. No. 150812, August 22, 2006, 499 SCRA 477, 483 further citing Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122605, April 30, 2001, 357 SCRA 441, 445-446.