 |
| Photo from Abante |
Makati
Mayor Abby Binay recently scored against billionaire Manny Pangilinan of Smart Communications
Inc. after the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) denied the petition of Smart
assailing the June and August 2019 resolutions of presiding Judge Augusto Jose
Y. Arreza, Branch 133 of the Regional Trial Court of Makati City.
The said
resolution compelled Smart to open its books to the city’s tax men, including
all revenues generated nationwide.
According
to Bilyonaryo website, Binay wanted Pangilinan to settle the P3.25 billion due
to unpaid franchise taxes of Smart.
“After
careful review of the petition and arguments presented by both parties, this
Court finds no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the public respondent
and/or the RTC. The Court does not perceive any injury of such magnitude if the
assailed resolutions are allowed to stand.” The 13-page decision penned by Associate
Justice Jean Marie Bacorro-Villena said.
Meanwhile, PLDT-Smart’s
legal team countered that the act was “improper” and is as good as giving the city
government of Makati to a second audit (referring to its franchise tax payments
for the years 2012 to 2015).
Makati also
said that Smart did not give a breakdown of its gross sales and receipts of its
branches and it cited that these documents were not confidential in nature.
The CTA
also said that production of needed documents will not expose Smart to a re-audit
of Makati government.
“The
relevancy found by the lower court to warrant the production of the subject
documents are only for the purposes of discovery. The actual relevancy of a
piece of evidence or its relevancy for the purpose of admissibility is,
however, a wholly different matter.”
“Relevancy
of the latter kind can only be determined after the court has been given an
opportunity to appreciate the evidence presented before it. At this juncture,
it is impossible either for this Court or the lower court to determine the
materiality of the subject documents prior to their production,” it said.
0 Comments