Digest for Tax 2
period within which suit could be
Republic v. Acebedo
commenced.
DOCTRINE/S: Taxation; Prescription;
FACTS: A suit for collection of deficiency
Request for reinvestigation.—The defendant
tax was filed against herein respondent Felix
after receiving the assessment notice asked
Acebedo in the amount of P5,962 for the
for a reinvestigation. There is no evidence
year 1948. A notice of assessment was
that this request was considered or acted
issued on September 24, 1949. The
upon. The then Acting Collector of Internal
respondent filed a motion to dismiss on the
Revenue issued a warrant of distraint and
ground of prescription. He claimed that the
levy for the full amount of the assessment.
notice of levy/distraint was filed beyond the
There was no follow-up of this warrant. The
5 year limitation from the assessment. The
request for reinvestigation did not suspend
motion was granted by the lower court and
the running of the period for filing an action
the same dismissed the case.
for collection.
Hence, the petitioner Republic filed an
Waiver of statute of limitations.—The delay
appeal with this court, contending that the
in collection could not be attributed to the
various requests for reinvestigation made by
defendant at all. His requests had been
the respondent suspended the 5 year period
unheeded until then, and there was nothing
prescription period and that the waiver of
to impede enforcement of the tax liability by
statute of limitations duly executed in 1959
any of the means provided by law. By Oct.
was sufficient to further suspend period of
4, 1955, more than five years had elapsed
prescription.
since the assessment in question was made.
Prescription had already set in, making
ISSUE: Whether or not a request for a
subsequent events in connection with. the
reinvestigation suspends the running of the
said assessment entirely immaterial. The
period for filing an action for collection?
written waiver of the statute signed by the
Whether or not the waiver of limitations
defendant could no longer revive the right of
suspended the period?
action, for under the law such waiver must
be executed within the original five-year
Page 1 of 2
Digest for Tax 2
RULING: No. The court is aware that it liability by any of the means provided by
was held in Commissioner of Internal law. By October 4, 1955, more than five
Revenue, vs. Consolidated Mining Company years had elapsed since assessment in
that a taxpayer may be prevented from question was made, making subsequent
setting up the defense of prescription even if events in connection with the said
he has not previously waived it in writing assessment irrelevant. Even the written
when by his repeated requests or positive waiver of the statute signed by the defendant
acts the Government has been, for good on December 17, 1959 could no longer
reasons, persuaded to postpone collection to revive the right of action, for under the law
make him feel that the demand was not such waiver must be executed within the
unreasonable or that no harassment or original five-year period within which suit
injustice is meant by the Government. could be commenced.
However, when a taxpayer asks for a
reinvestigation of the tax assessment issued
to him and such reinvestigation is made, on
the basis of which the Government makes
another assessment, the five-year period
with which an action for collection may be
commenced should be counted from this last
assessment.
In this case, even after the request for
reinvestigation was made, the petitioner did
not act upon it, hence, the request for
reinvestigation did not suspend the running
of the period for filing an action for
collection.
Moreover, up to October 4, 1955 the
delay in collection could not be attributed to
the defendant at all. His requests in fact had
been unheeded until then, and there was
nothing to impede enforcement of the tax
Page 2 of 2
