Issuance Date Date of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs The Orchard

Receipt Golf and Country Club, Inc., CTA EB No. 2335,

April 25, 2022.

PAN 2/17/2014 3/26/2021 The FAN/LD was issued prematurely issued

FAN/FLD 3/28/2014 without waiting for the lapse of the 15-day period
granted to the taxpayer to respond to the PAN.

Issuance Date Date of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs Yumex

Receipt Philippines Corporation; G.R. No. 222476; May 5,
2021

PAN 12/16/2010 1/18/2011 The taxpayer has 15 days from the date of receipt of
FAN/FLD 1/10/2011 1/18/2011 the PAN to respond to the said notice. Only after
receiving the taxpayer’s response or in case of the
taxpayer’s default can respondent issue the
FLD/FAN. (Under the circumstance, taxpayer was not
given any notice of the preliminary assessment at all and
was deprived of the opportunity to respond to the same
before given the final assessment)

Moreover, the reliance by petitioner and the BIR on

constructive service of notice is unavailing and not
justified by the circumstances. The PAN was posted
through registered mail so there are easily records
available by which the BIR could have determined
whether or not respondent actually received the
notice and the date of such receipt. The BIR did not
offer any explanation as to why it did not verify
first these details with the post office, which would
have been more prudent thing to do instead of
immediately considering respondent to have
already constructively received the PAN for
purposes of issuing the FLD/FAN.

Issuance Date Date of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs Apex

Receipt Chemical Corporation, CTA EB No. 1382, October
14, 2016.

PAN 12/17/2010 1/13/2011 CIR fail to observe Apex’ 15-day period to file a
FAN/FLD 1/7/2011 1/17/2011 protest against the PAN, the CIR likewise issued
the FANs as early as 1/7/2011, or even before Apex
received the PAN on January 13, 2011. In other
words, the CIR already prejudge that Apex is liable
to pay the subject deficiency taxes, which further
violates Apex’ right to due process.

Issuance Date Date of Polymer Products Philippines Inc. vs CIR; CTA

Receipt Case No. 8299, January 30, 2015
PAN 12/17/2010 1/3/2011
FAN/FLD 1/7/2011 1/17/2011

Issuance Date Date of CIR vs Hermano (San) Miguel Febres Cordero

 Receipt Medical Education Foundation (De La Salle –
Health Science Institute) Inc.; CTA EB NO. 1151;
February 17, 2016
PAN 12/12/1008 1/5/2009 Petitioner did not wait for respondent to reply to
1/20/2009 the PAN nor considered the arguments raised in
(Protest) respondent’s protest thereto. The FLD and FAN
FAN/FLD 1/9/2009 1/9/2009 were already prepared by petitioner as early as
1/9/2009 or way before the lapse of the 15-day
period within which petitioner could filed a reply
or protest to the PAN.

Issuance Date Date of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs Linde

Receipt Philippines, Inc., CTA EB No. 1515, March 7, 2018.
PAN 12/6/2012 1/2/2013 The 15-day period to take action on the PAN starts
FAN/FLD Undated 12/27/2012 to run not from its issuance, but from the taxpayer’s
receipt thereof.

Since petitioner received the FAN prior to its

receipt of the PAN, BIR clearly did not give
taxpayer a chance to file a response or reply to the
PAN. Such failure on the part of respondent
constitutes violation of Section 228 of the NIRC, as
amended and Section 3 of RR No. 12-99.

Issuance Date Date of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs Pacific

Receipt Bayview Properties, Inc., CTA EB No. 1677,
October 8, 2018
PAN 1/5/2011 1/10/2011 The CIR or his duly authorized representative is
1/25/2011 duty bound to wait for the expiation of 15 days
(Protest) from the date of receipt of the PAN before issuing
FAN/FLD 1/24/2011 2/2/2011 the FLD and FAN. Such a process or procure is part
and parcel of the due process requirement in the
issuance of a deficiency tax assessment.

Issuance Date Date of Prime Steel Mill, Incorporated vs CIR, G.R. No.
Receipt 249153, September 12, 2022
PAN 1/7/2009 The FAN was issued on January 14, 2009, merely
1/22/2009 seven days after the taxpayer received the
(Protest) PAN on January 7, 2009, and well within the
FAN/FLD 1/14/2009 2/12/2009 15-day period for petitioner to reply to the
PAN.

Issuance Date Date of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs Missouri

Receipt Square, Inc., G.R. No. 238574, July 11, 2018
PAN 1/14/2013 The SC agrees with the finding of the CTA En Banc
FAN/FLD 1/21/2013 that respondent was deprived of procedural due
process as BIR failed to strictly comply with the
procedure in the issuance of deficiency tax
asessmemt – RR NO. 12-99