Practice question
The CIR has a qualifying unrebutted presumption but previously assured the taxpayer in the assessment process that only the ordinary period was being applied, acting inconsistently with the later ten-year theory. Assume the conduct fits Villanueva’s second due-process requirement. Does the numerical presumption alone settle validity?
- No; the MAIN guidelines also require conduct consistent with invoking the extraordinary period
- Yes, numerical size eliminates every due-process requirement
- Yes, misleading conduct is always immaterial
- No, because a presumption can never support ten years
- Yes, a court may dispense with notice in every fraud allegation
Legal references
- CIR v Villanueva GR249540 February28,2024 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/feb2024/gr_249540_2024.html MAIN statutory requisites, strict presumption threshold, due process.
- NIRC RA8424, Sections203,222–223 and228: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1997/ra_8424_1997.html Sections222(a) and248(B).
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.