Practice question
A corporation seeks suspension and asserts patent illegality requiring no bond, but the decisive facts are disputed. It demands automatic acceptance of counsel’s allegations. Which approach accords with Pacquiao?
- The CTA must receive and evaluate evidence before determining dispensation or reduction on those disputed facts
- Every allegation automatically proves patent illegality
- Security is cancelled merely by using the phrase due process
- The court must decide without hearing evidence
- A claim of illegality automatically forgives the tax
Legal references
- Revised CTA Rules: https://lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_05_11_07_cta_2005.html Rule10 Sections3–7.
- Spouses Pacquiao v CTA GR213394 April6,2016 MAIN: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2016/apr2016/gr_213394_2016.html MAIN evidence-dependent determination.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.