Practice question
A CTA criminal information properly alleges PHP2 million principal under the covered tax offense. After trial the proven civil amount is smaller. The accused argues that the initial jurisdiction necessarily disappears solely because the final proof differs from the pleaded amount. Which is best?
- Jurisdiction initially vested on sufficient material allegations is not automatically lost solely because proof later yields a lower amount.
- The final civil computation always retroactively erases every criminal proceeding.
- Only penalties were permitted in the original jurisdictional comparison.
- Every estimate means legally no amount was alleged.
- The parties may create a new court by agreement.
Legal references
- RA9282 Section7, CTA jurisdiction: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2004/ra_9282_2004.html
- People v. Mendez, G.R. Nos.208310-11 and208662, March28,2023, EN BANC MAIN: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/69095
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.