Net invalidating interracial dating statistics high school
Further, the burden of proving that the assessments were in fact received by the taxpayer lies with the BIR. 224327), the BIR failed to prove the receipt of the final assessment.
In the case of Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs Bank of the Philippine Islands (G. The SC ruled that, essentially, “no assessment was issued.” There is also a 120-day period prescribed for the duration of audit, but this is apparently not part of the due process.
But Carpio advised the President not to tackle in his SONA the matter of the fishing deal with China because it will make the verbal agreement binding to the Philippine government.President Duterte earlier admitted that he had a verbal agreement with Chinese President Xi Jinping to allow Chinese to fish in Recto Bank in exchange for allowing Filipino fishermen to fish in Scarborough Shoal.The SC justice noted that prior to Duterte’s pronouncement in his interview with Pastor Apollo Quiboloy, there was still a debate in the government on whether the verbal fishing deal was legally binding.“The only way we can stop this is for the Senate as soon as they convene to pass a resolution repudiating it. “Or the Senate can, if they want to be diplomatic about it, say that a verbal agreement cannot take effect until we ratify it. Carpio said the verbal fishing deal with China which supposedly also allows Filipino fishers to fish in China-controlled areas in the South China Sea was an international agreement on a substantive issue and needed Senate concurrence. “I don’t think the Senate will ratify,” Carpio said.Critics argued that President Duterte may have committed an impeachable offense for entering into a verbal fishing agreement with China since only the Philippines has the right to fish in the country’s waters including the 200-nautical mile EEZ.