Practice question
A section 255 prosecution ends in acquittal because criminal guilt was not established beyond reasonable doubt. The taxpayer insists that every deficiency-tax claim relative to the case necessarily vanished, without any separate civil analysis. What does E & D Parts Supply require?
- Automatic cancellation of every tax obligation
- A new criminal conviction before any civil inquiry
- Recognition that acquittal alone does not necessarily extinguish the tax duty; the corresponding civil liability must receive its proper determination
- A presumption that all tax figures asserted are correct
- Ignoring the acquittal and retrying criminal guilt without limit
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2004/ra_9282_2004.html — RA 9282, section 7(b)(1), corresponding civil action
- https://lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_05_11_07_cta_2005.html — Revised Rules of the CTA, Rule 9 section 11
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/69095 — People v. Mendez, G.R. Nos. 208310-11 and 208662, March 28, 2023, main opinion
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/jan2024/gr_259284_2024.html — People v. E & D Parts Supply, Inc., G.R. No. 259284, January 24, 2024
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2017/ra_10963_2017.html — RA 10963, section 76 amending NIRC section 254
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.