Due to a one-day delay, the Court of Tax Appeals en banc dismissed an appeal by government prosecutors seeking to overturn the dismissal of a tax fraud case against the children of businesswoman and pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim Napoles and a company they control.
The CTA en banc said the prosecutors’ petition for review was filed out of time, as the deadline for contesting the dismissal of the case was on December 19, 2024, but the petition was filed on December 20, 2024.
The ruling stemmed from a case filed against JCLN Global Properties Development Corp. (JCLN), James Christopher Napoles, and Jo Christine Napoles over the alleged filing of a fraudulent tax return in 2009.
The CTA Second Division dismissed the case, saying the offense charged had prescribed.
Government prosecutors appealed the ruling before the CTA en banc, which dismissed their petition for being filed beyond the allowed period.
In its September 25, 2026 decision, the CTA said its rule is clear that the petition for review should be filed within 15 days from the receipt of the copy of the resolution or decision being appealed.
In this case, it said the Department of Justice received the resolution dismissing the case against the Napoles children on December 4, 2024, which meant the deadline is set at December 19, 2024.
The DOJ contended that the period to appeal should be reckoned from December 5, 2024, which was when its deputized special prosecutors received a copy of the assailed resolution.
But the CTA en banc was unconvinced, saying the public prosecutor remains the principal prosecuting authority even if it has deputized lawyers from the Bureau of Internal Revenue.
This means that determining the period of appeal is based on when the DOJ prosecutors received the resolution, it said.
“The authority to prosecute by virtue of deputation does not alter the identity of the principal prosecuting authority whose receipt of the assailed judgment or resolution triggers the period for seeking appellate review. Otherwise, the commencement of the reglementary period would depend not upon service upon the authority legally vested with direction and control of the criminal action, but upon receipt by a deputized lawyer whose authority is merely derivative,” it said.
The CTA en banc said it cannot disregard this procedural lapse as it said that failing to file the appeal within the prescribed period defeats the statutory right to appeal and prevents it from having jurisdiction over the case.