You are on page 1of 2

ATLAS CONSOLIDATED VS. CIR Facts: Atlas Consolidated is a zero-rated VAT person for being an exporter of copper concentrates.

On January 1994, Atlas filed its VAT return for the fourth quarter of 1993, showing a total input tax and an excess VAT credit. Then, on January 1996, Atlas filed for a tax refund or tax credit certificate with CIR. However, the CTA denied Atlas claim for refund due to Atlas failure to comply with the documentary requirements prescribed under Sec. 16 of RR No. 5-87, as amended by RR No. 3-88. CTA denied Atlas MR stating that Atlas has failed to substantiate its claim that it has not applied its alleged excess in put taxes to any of its subsequent quarters output tax liability. The CA affirmed CTAs ruling. ISSUE: What are the documents required to claim for VAT input refund? W/N Atlas is entitled to claim to a tax refund. Ruling: When claiming tax refund/credit, the VAT-registered taxpayer must be able to establish that it does not have refundable or creditable input VAT, and the same has not been applied against its output VAT liabilities information which are supposed to be reflected in the taxpayers VAT returns. Thus, an application for tax refund/credit must be accompanied by copies of the taxpayers VAT return/s for the taxable quarter/s concerned. The formal offer of evidence of Atlas failed to include photocopy of its export documents, as required. Without the export documents, the purchase invoice/receipts submitted by Atlas as proof of its input taxes cannot be verified as being directly attributable to the goods so exported. Atlas claim for credit or refund of input taxes cannot be granted due to its failure to show convincingly that the same has not been applied to any of its output tax liability as provided under Sec. 106(a) of the Tax Code. National Internal Revenue Code; value-added tax; claim for credit or refund of input value-added tax; documentary requirements. When claiming tax refund or credit, the value-added taxpayer must be able to establish that it does have refundable or creditable input value-added tax (VAT), and the same has not been applied against its output VAT liabilities- information which are supposed to be reflected in the taxpayers VAT returns. Thus, an application for tax refund or credit must be accompanied by copies of the taxpayers VAT return or returns for taxable quarter or quarters concerned. Atlas Consolidated Mining and Development Corporation vs Commissioner of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 159471, January 26, 2011 . In the recent case of Mirant Pagbilao Corporation vs. CIR (G.R. No. 172129, September 12, 2008) , the Supreme Court had ruled that the claim for refund of unutilized input VAT payments must be filedwithin two (2) years from the close of the taxable quarter when the relevant sales were made. Said ruling, however, should not be made to apply to the present case but should be applied prospectively pursuant to and consistent with the numerous rulings of the Supreme Court, given that petitioner Kepco's claim involves unutilized input taxes for the 3rd quarter of 2000. Hence, the prescriptive period applicable in the instant case would still be the period enunciated in the case of Atlas Consolidated Mining and Development Corporation vs. CIR (G.R. Nos. 141104 & 148763, June 8, 2007), where it was held that the counting of the two-year prescriptive period is reckoned

from the filing of the quarterly VAT returns. Kepco Ilijan Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, C.T.A. E.B. Case No. 528 (C.T.A. Case No. 6550), October 14, 201