This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2011-01-19 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Going by such logic, the CTA concluded that a refund of erroneously paid or illegally received tax can only be made in favor of the taxpayer, pursuant to Section 204(C) of the NIRC. [31] As categorically ruled in the Cebu Portland Cement [32] and Contex [33] cases, in the case of indirect taxes, it is the manufacturer of the goods who is entitled to claim any refund thereof. [34] Therefore, it follows that the indirect taxes paid by the manufacturers or producers of the goods cannot be refunded to the purchasers of the goods because the purchasers are not the taxpayers. [35] | |||||