TAX CASE EXERCISE: Background: The Supreme Court in its decision…

Question Answered step-by-step TAX CASE EXERCISE: Background: The Supreme Court in its decision… TAX CASE EXERCISE:  Background: The Supreme Court in its decision consolidated and resolved three (3) separate Petitions, where the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Commissioner) is the Petitioner in the 2 Petitions for Certiorari, while the De La Salle University is the Petitioner on 1 Petition for Certiorari, namely:  1. G.R. No. 196596 filed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Commissioner) to assail the December 10, 2010 decision and March 29, 2011 resolution of the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) in En Banc Case No. 622;2  2. G.R. No. 198841 filed by De La Salle University, Inc. (DLSU) to assail the June 8, 2011 decision and October 4, 2011 resolution in CTA En Banc Case No. 671;3 and  3. G.R. No. 198941 filed by the Commissioner to assail the June 8, 2011 decision and October 4, 2011 resolution in CTA En Banc Case No. 671.4Guide Questions: 1. Upon the issuance of a Letter of Authority (LOA), the Bureau of Internal Revenue was authorized to conduct a tax investigation on the accounting records of De La Salle University. What are the alleged tax deficiency assessment that De La Salle University is made to pay?  2. What was the decision of the Court of Tax Appeals that prompted the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Commissioner) to assail the December 10, 2010 decision and March 29, 2011 resolution of the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) in En Banc Case No. 622 to appeal to the Supreme thru Petition for Certiorari in G.R. No. 196596?  3. What was the decision of the Court of Tax Appeals that prompted the La Salle University, Inc. (DLSU) to assail the June 8, 2011 decision and October 4, 2011 resolution in CTA En Banc Case No. 671 to appeal to the Supreme thru Petition for Certiorari in G.R. No. 198841?  4.What was the decision of the Court of Tax Appeals that prompted the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Commissioner) to assail the June 8, 2011 decision and October 4, 2011 resolution of the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) in En Banc Case No. 671 to appeal the Supreme thru Petition for Certiorari in G.R. No. 198941?  5. What specific provision of the 1987 Constitution did the De La Salle University invoke or cite to argue its case before the Court of Tax Appeals and up to the Supreme Court that indeed as a taxpayer it is not subject to income tax?  6. How did De La Salle University argue its case pursuant to the provision of the 1987 Constitution? 7. How much was the tax deficiency assessment against De La Salle University as a result of the finding of the Revenue Examiner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue?  8. How much was the actual tax deficiency assessment against De La Salle University as decided by the Supreme Court?  9. What was the dissenting opinion (opposing opinion) of Justice Marvic Leonen in the instant consolidated Petitions for Review before the Supreme Court between De La Salle University as petitioner and Commissioner of Internal Revenue (Commissioner) as petitioner in some instance?  10. If you were the Justice of the Supreme Court, how would you rule the 3 Consolidated Petitions for Review?  NOTE: SEE ATTACHED FILES FOR REFERENCE Law Social Science Tax law BSA TAXATION Share QuestionEmailCopy link Comments (0)