SC stops tax case vs Pacman

MANILA, Philippines - The Supreme Court (SC) yesterday granted relief to world boxing champion and Sarangani Rep. Manny Pacquiao and his wife Jinkee in their P2.2-billion tax evasion case.

In a two-page resolution released yesterday afternoon, the third division of the high court issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) enjoining the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) from implementing its order last July requiring the couple to post a cash bond of P3,298,514,894.35 or surety bond worth P4,947,772,341.53.

The SC also extended an earlier TRO issued by the CTA enjoining the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) from “issuing, executing, enforcing, implementing or otherwise giving effect to any Warrant of Distraint and/or Levy, Warrants of Garnishment, and Notice of Tax Lien, and from attempting to collect any tax on the basis of the deficiency income tax and VAT assessments against petitioners for the years 2008 and 2009, as well as any increments thereon.”

Lastly, the high court directed the CTA to resolve the case with deliberate dispatch.

The order was effective immediately for an indefinite period or until further orders from the high court.

In their 75-page petition filed last July 24, the Pacquiao couple asked the high court to issue a TRO enjoining the BIR from collecting from them the total deficiency of P3,298,514,894.35.

Petitioners asked the SC to stop the implementation of a CTA order last July 11 requiring them to post a cash bond in the amount of P4,947,772,341.53.

The couple wanted a much lower amount of bond for their petition in the CTA questioning the BIR tax assessment.

Through lawyers from Romulo, Mabanta, Buenaventura, Sayoc & De Los Angeles offices, they told the SC that the amount set by the CTA was “effectively an impossible condition given that their undisputed net worth is only Pl, 185,984,697.”

They said the CTA committed “grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction” in setting the bond amounts and requiring them to post the same within 30 days from receipt of resolution.

The couple alleged that the BIR also committed the same offense and even violated their constitutional right to due process “in presuming the correctness of a fraud assessment without evidentiary support other than the issuance of the fraud assessments themselves.”

They said the tax agency “commenced tax collection process against Jinkee without issuing or serving a notice against her” and that it also “failed to comply with the procedural due process requirements for summary tax collection remedies under Sections 207(A) and (B) of the Tax Code when it commenced summary collection remedies before the expiration of the period for Petitioners to pay the assessed deficiency taxes.”