Practice question
An established fraudulent criminal violation is renamed a minor documentation incident in a proposed compromise form, without changing the underlying facts. The taxpayer signs. Does the new label and consent alone avoid 204's fraud exclusion?
- Yes; every signature legalizes any barred compromise.
- No; the actual fraud character and statutory authority cannot be displaced solely by a label and signature.
- Yes; form captions automatically repeal statutory exclusions.
- No; because the signature automatically constitutes a criminal conviction.
- Yes; fraud is an exclusion only if printed in red.
Legal references
- NIRC Sections204,206-208,222-223 and248-249, as applicable and amended: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1997/ra_8424_1997.html
- BIR RMC46-99, extrajudicial compromise of criminal tax violations: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/10/47959
- RA11976 Sections41 and45, EOPT surcharge and specified concessions: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2024/ra_11976_2024.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.