Practice question
The CTA finds that the method used to collect a disputed national tax is patently contrary to law and jeopardizes the taxpayer’s interests. The BIR insists that a cash deposit or bond is invariably indispensable even in that situation. What does Pacquiao recognize?
- The CTA may dispense with the deposit or bond in the recognized unlawful-collection situation, upon the required judicial determination
- An allegation alone always compels waiver
- Only the taxpayer may decide whether a bond is needed
- The court must ignore the legality of collection
- Every assessment is cancelled whenever a bond is waived
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1997/ra_8424_1997.html — NIRC, section 218
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2004/ra_9282_2004.html — RA 9282, section 9 amending RA 1125 section 11
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2016/apr2016/gr_213394_2016.html — Spouses Pacquiao v. CTA, G.R. No. 213394, April 6, 2016
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/jun2010/gr_166134_2010.html — Angeles City v. Angeles Electric Corporation, G.R. No. 166134, June 29, 2010
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.