c. Decision of CIR on Protest

Action of the Commissioner on the Protest Filed

Scenarios After Protest Filed:

• CIR denies the protest to the FAN (directly or indirectly); or
• Does not act on such protest.

Direct Denial: Final Decision on Disputed Assessment (FDDA)

The nomenclature of the BIR’s denial of the protest to the FAN could vary. It may be called a Final Decision on a Disputed Assessment (FDDA), among others. (R.M.C. No. 18-13)¹

Requisites of a Valid FDDA

• Must be issued by the CIR or his duly authorized representative;
• Must contain the facts, law, and rules on which the assessment is based;

This is the same rule applied for the assessment itself although it is clear that the assessment and the decision are two distinct documents

• Must be served on the taxpayer by personal service, substituted service, or service by mail; service to the tax agent/practitioner, who is appointed by the taxpayer under circumstances prescribed in the pertinent regulations on accreditation of tax agents, shall be deemed service to the taxpayer; and
• Must state that the same is his final decision (R.R. No. 12-99, as amended by R.R. No. 18-2013)²

Rationale: To avoid any confusion that could adversely affect the rights and interests of the taxpayer (Allied Banking Corporation v. CIR, G.R. No. 175097, 5 February 2010)³

It is true that the Commissioner is not obliged to accept the taxpayer's explanations. However, when the Commissioner rejects these explanations, he or she must give some reason for doing so. He or she must give the particular facts upon which his or her conclusions are based, and those facts must appear in the record. Further, the Court ruled that the presumption of regularity rule cannot be applied here given that it was shown that there was evidence that the CIR did not exert utmost efforts to review. Thus, the assessment was deemed null and void. (CIR vs. Avon Products Manufacturing, Inc., G.R. No. 201398-99)⁴

The FDDA must contain the facts, law, and rules on which the assessment is based. This is the same rule applied for the assessment itself although it is clear that the assessment and the decision are two distinct documents. The rationale for the requirement imposed on the assessment is to accord due process to the taxpayer to be able to file an intelligent protest. On the other hand, if the FDDA itself does not conform to the requirements , the same is void and thus it is as if no decision was rendered. The effect therefore is that what is appealable to the CTA is the inaction of the CIR or the duly authorized representative. (CIR v. Liquigaz Philippines Corporation, G.R. No. 215534, 18 April 2016)⁵