2015 Taxation Law, Q21

MMM, Inc., a domestic telecommunications company, handles incoming telecommunications services for non-resident foreign companies by relaying international calls within the Philippines. To broaden the coverage of its telecommunications services throughout the country, MMM, Inc. entered into various interconnection agreements with local carriers. The non-resident foreign corporations pay MMM, Inc. in US dollars inwardly remitted through Philippine banks, in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas.
MMM, Inc. filed its Quarterly VAT Returns for 2000. Subsequently, MMM, Inc. timely filed with the BIR an administrative claim for the refund of the amount of P6,321,486.50, representing excess input VAT attributable to its effectively zero-rated sales in 2000. The BIR ruled to deny the claim for refund of MMM, Inc. because the VAT official receipts submitted by MMM, Inc. to substantiate said claim did not bear the words “zero-rated” as required under Section 4.108-1 of Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 7-95. On appeal, the CTA division and the CT A en bane affirmed the BIR ruling.
MMM, Inc. appealed to the Supreme Court arguing that the NIRC itself did not provide for such a requirement. RR No. 7-95 should not prevail over a taxpayer’s substantive right to claim tax refund or credit.
a. Rule on the appeal of MMM, Inc. (3%)
b. Will your answer in (a) be any different if MMM, Inc. was claiming refund of excess input VAT attributable to its effectively zero-rated sales in 2012? (2%)

Quick check

What is the effect of failing to imprint the word zero-rated on official receipts when claiming an input VAT refund for zero-rated sales?

Under Section 4.108-1 of RR No. 7-95 and Section 113 of the NIRC, why must zero-rated receipts be explicitly imprinted?

Which landmark Supreme Court doctrine affirmed that RR No. 7-95 invoicing rules were incorporated into statutory law by RA 9337?

How are statutory provisions granting tax refunds or tax credit certificates construed under Philippine tax jurisprudence?

Choices available with full access.

Would a 2012 claim for refund of excess input VAT succeed if official receipts lack the imprinted word zero-rated?

Choices available with full access.

Unlock the full Commercial and Tax Law answers

Learn more about these topics

1. Zero-Rated Invoicing Requirement
Under Section 4.108-1 of Revenue Regulations Number 7-95 and Section 113 of the National Internal Revenue Code, as amended by Republic Act Number 9337, the imprinting of the word zero-rated on value-added tax invoices or official receipts is mandatory for zero-rated sales. Failure to imprint the term zero-rated on official receipts invalidates a claim for input value-added tax refund or tax credit certificate because tax exemptions and tax refunds are strictly construed against the taxpayer and in favor of the taxing authority.

2. Legislative Reenactment Doctrine
In Kepco Philippines Corporation versus Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the Supreme Court held that the administrative invoicing requirement under Revenue Regulations Number 7-95 was subsequently incorporated into statutory law under Section 113 of the Tax Code through Republic Act Number 9337. Under the doctrine of legislative reenactment, when Congress reenacts a law incorporating administrative regulations issued by executive agencies, such regulations acquire statutory force and validate earlier administrative interpretations requiring strict compliance.

3. Strict Construction Rule
Tax refunds and tax credit certificates derived from unutilized input value-added tax are in the nature of tax exemptions. Statutory provisions granting tax refunds are strictly construed against the claimant taxpayer. Failure to strictly comply with mandatory administrative and statutory invoicing requirements, such as printing zero-rated on official receipts, is fatal to an administrative or judicial claim for refund, regardless of whether foreign currency payments were inwardly remitted through banking channels.

About these questions and answers
The questions reproduced here are the official texts of the Philippine Bar Examinations, published by the Supreme Court. They are reproduced for study purposes.The suggested answers are the author’s own.

They are not official answers, have no connection with the Supreme Court, the Office of the Bar Confidant, or any bar review institution, and are not endorsed by any of them. Official answer keys, where released, should be preferred over anything here.Nothing on this page is legal advice, and reading it creates no lawyer-client relationship. Do not rely on any suggested answer in an actual legal matter. Consult counsel on your own facts.Suggested answers reflect the law and jurisprudence the author considers applicable as of the date shown.

Where a question comes from an earlier examination, the suggested answer applies the law as it now stands, which may differ from the law in force when the question was given, and may therefore differ from what would have been the correct answer at that time. Where the difference is material, the answer notes it.The practice scoring feature measures wording overlap with the suggested answer. It is not a grade, carries no official weight, and says nothing about whether your reasoning is sound.Errors are possible. If you find one, please tell me and I will correct it.Last reviewed: October 2026