[go: up one dir, main page]

0% found this document useful (0 votes)
5 views3 pages

PPG Script

The case involves the Bureau of Internal Revenue as the petitioner against Spouses Antonio Villan Manly and Ruby Ong Manly regarding tax liability. The petitioner claims the respondents failed to declare substantial income, while the respondents argue they complied with tax laws and that the Bureau misinterpreted the facts. The court will review the evidence and issue a ruling in due course.

Uploaded by

juariorheaney
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
5 views3 pages

PPG Script

The case involves the Bureau of Internal Revenue as the petitioner against Spouses Antonio Villan Manly and Ruby Ong Manly regarding tax liability. The petitioner claims the respondents failed to declare substantial income, while the respondents argue they complied with tax laws and that the Bureau misinterpreted the facts. The court will review the evidence and issue a ruling in due course.

Uploaded by

juariorheaney
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Judge: (gavel bangs) Court is now in session.

We are here to hear the case of the


Bureau of Internal Revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue,
as the petitioner, against the Court of Appeals and the respondents, Spouses
Antonio Villan Manly and Ruby Ong Manly.

Clerk: (reads the case number and parties involved) The case number is 197890.
The petitioner is the Bureau of Internal Revenue, and the respondents are the
spouses Antonio Villan Manly and Ruby Ong Manly.

Judge: Thank you. Counsel for the petitioner, you may proceed with your opening
statement.

Petitioner’s Opening Statement


Petitioner’s Counsel: (stands) Your Honor, esteemed members of the court, we are
here today to address the issue of tax liability concerning the respondents, Spouses
Manly. The Bureau of Internal Revenue contends that the Court of Appeals erred in
its decision regarding the assessment of taxes owed by the respondents.

The evidence will show that the respondents failed to declare substantial income
from their business activities, which is a violation of the National Internal Revenue
Code. We will present documentation and testimonies that demonstrate the
respondents' non-compliance with tax regulations, leading to an unjust enrichment at
the expense of the government.

Respondents’ Opening Statement


Respondents’ Counsel: (stands) Your Honor, while we acknowledge the importance
of tax compliance, we assert that the Bureau of Internal Revenue has misinterpreted
the facts of this case. The respondents have acted in good faith and have made
every effort to comply with tax laws.

We will demonstrate that the income in question was either exempt from taxation or
inaccurately assessed. Furthermore, we will argue that the Bureau's actions
constitute an overreach of authority, and the Court of Appeals' decision should be
upheld.

Presentation of Evidence
Judge: (nods) Thank you, counsel. We will now proceed with the presentation of
evidence. Petitioner, you may call your first witness.

Petitioner’s Counsel: (calls witness) We call Mr. Juan Dela Cruz, a revenue officer
from the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

Witness: (takes the stand) I affirm that the testimony I will give is the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth.

Petitioner’s Counsel: Mr. Dela Cruz, can you explain the basis for the tax
assessment against the respondents?

Witness: Yes, Your Honor. Upon audit, we discovered that the respondents reported
significantly lower income than what was reflected in their business transactions. Our
investigation revealed discrepancies that warranted the assessment of additional
taxes.

Cross-Examination
Respondents’ Counsel: (stands) Mr. Dela Cruz, you mentioned discrepancies. Can
you specify the nature of these discrepancies?

Witness: The discrepancies were primarily in the reported sales figures compared to
bank deposits and third-party reports.

Respondents’ Counsel: (smirks) And isn’t it true that the respondents provided
documentation to support their reported income?

Witness: They did provide some documentation, but it was insufficient to account for
the total income generated.

Closing Arguments
Judge: (after evidence is presented) We will now hear closing arguments. Petitioner,
you may proceed.
Petitioner’s Counsel: Your Honor, the evidence clearly indicates that the respondents
failed to comply with tax laws. Their actions not only undermine the integrity of our
tax system but also place an undue burden on compliant taxpayers. We urge the
court to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals and uphold the tax assessment.

Respondents’ Counsel: Your Honor, the respondents have acted in good faith and
have made every effort to comply with the law. The Bureau's assessment is based
on flawed interpretations and assumptions. We respectfully request that the court
affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals, as it reflects a fair and just interpretation
of the law.

Judge’s Conclusion
Judge: (gavel bangs) Thank you, counsel. The court will take the matter under
advisement and will issue a ruling in due course. Court is adjourned.

Clerk: (gathers documents) All rise.

You might also like