The
Supreme Court (SC) has upheld with finality the tax-treaty relief of
Deutsche Bank AG Manila branch. It was, thus, cleared to collect refund
from the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR).
In the Entry of
Judgment dated January 24, 2014, the SC First Division denied “with
finality” a motion for reconsideration filed by the BIR on the High
Court’s decision, dated August 19, 2013, granting tax-treaty relief to
Deutsche Bank.
The SC ordered the
“respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue to refund or issue a tax
credit certificate in favor of petitioner Deutsche the amount of P22.562
million, representing the erroneously paid BPRT [branch profits
remittance tax ] for 2002 and prior taxable years.”
SC’s decision should
prompt the Philippines to start honoring international agreements and
stop the BIR’s practice of consistently denying tax-treaty relief
applications on the grounds of noncompliance of the 15-day-period
requirement.
The case stemmed from
global financial-services provider Deutsche Bank’s initial noncompliance
with the BIR procedure under Revenue Memorandum Order (RMO) 01-2000,
requiring that an application to claim tax treaty benefits should be
filed at least 15 days prior to a transaction.
The SC nullified the
rule in RMO 072-2010, which contends that failure to file a tax treaty
relief application within the prescribed period will result in its
disqualification.
The High Tribunal
explained that the BIR must not impose additional requirements that
would negate access to relief as provided under international
agreements.
The SC held that the
period of application of tax treaty compliance as outlined in RMO
01-2000 should not operate to divest entitlement to the relief.
It added that to deny
access would constitute a violation of the time-honored international
doctrine of pactasuntservanda (Latin for “agreements must be kept”)
whereby agreeing states or nations comply in good faith with their
treaty obligations.
The obligation to comply with a tax treaty must take precedence over administrative rules and procedural requirements.
No comments:
Post a Comment