SC gives beauty product distributor jail term, affirms CTA ruling

The Supreme Court gave a beauty product distributor a two- to four-year jail term and a P20,000 fine, affirming a Court of Tax Appeals (CTA) decision that found her guilty of supplying the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) with incorrect and inaccurate information.   In a statement Thursday, the BIR said that the high tribunal also ordered distributor Gloria Kintanar to pay the bureau P6 million in taxes for violating Section 255 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC).   In December 2010, the Tax Appeals Court en banc promulgated its decision on Criminal Case Nos. 0-033 and 0-034 involving Kintanar.   The SC on Jan. 24, 2011denied “with finality” Kintanar’s motion for reconsideration as “no compelling reason exists and no substantial arguments were raised to warrant its reconsideration,” according to the BIR statement.   The BIR filed the case against Kintanar in 2005 for failing to file her income tax returns for 2000 and 2001.   Kintanar, an independent contractor of Forever Living Products Philippines Inc., presented income tax returns to the BIR where her address was listed as Lagro Subdivision in Quezon City, but she actually lived Parañaque’s Merville subdivision, according to the CTA. The appellate court said it was convinced that the prosecution established Kintanar’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.”   Kintanar claimed she asked her husband to file her income tax return, and that he in turn entrusted the task to a hired accountant.   Her sole reliance on her husband to file their ITRs is not a valid reason to justify [what she did], considering she knew that she and her husband are mandated by law to file their ITRs, the Tax Appeals Court said.   In its Aug. 26, 2009, the CTA Second Division noted “the evident lack of concern on the part of the Kintanar spouses appear to be voluntary and considered as intentional disregard of their tax responsibilities to the government.”   It added, “Worse, accused even presented fabricated and flawed ITRs purporting to be received by a revenue district of which she is not a resident.” — AL/VS, GMA News