A DEPARTMENT of Justice (DOJ) panel of prosecutors on Tuesday recommended the filing of multiple counts of tax-evasion charges against Party-list Rep. Juan Miguel “Mikey” Arroyo and his wife, Angela.

In a 28-page resolution, the DOJ panel, led by Senior Assistant State Prosecutor Lagrimas Agaran found merit to the complaint filed by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) to hold the couple liable for violation of Section 255 of the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC) for their alleged failure to file income-tax returns (ITR) and for allegedly underdeclaring their income.

The Arroyo camp, however, insinuated that their indictment was politically motivated considering that the Arroyos have been the subject of persecution under the Aquino administration.

“This administration has not hidden its intent to put us behind bars. In fact, this is part of the President’s marching order against our family. It is just unfortunate that my wife was included despite the fact that we have sufficiently disputed the allegations,” Arroyo said.

“But we’ve always believed in the rule of law and we will face the charges head-on because our conscience is clear. In the end, I know we will be vindicated and justice will be served,” he added.

The DOJ prosecutors’ panel found probable cause to indict Arroyo for three counts of violation of Section 255 of the NIRC for his alleged failure to file ITR for taxable years 2004, 2005 and 2006.

On the other hand, the DOJ found enough basis to charge Angela for seven counts of violation of Section 255 of the NIRC for her alleged failure to file income-tax returns for taxable years 2003 to 2009.

The DOJ did not give credence to the argument of the couple that their right to due process was violated when the BIR prematurely filed the complaint with the DOJ without prior assessment, which is a mandatory prerequisite to a criminal prosecution.

“While there can be no civil action to enforce collection before the assessment procedures provided in the Code have been followed, there is no requirement for the precise computation and assessment of the tax before there can be criminal prosecution under this Code,” the resolution said.

The DOJ also insisted that the BIR also complied with its Memorandum Order 27-10 requiring the conduct of investigation prior to the filing of the complaint.

It noted that before the BIR filed the case for preliminary investigation with the DOJ, they requested documents such as SALN filed with government offices like the Office of the Ombudsman and House of Representatives to determine whether the respondents had indeed violated the tax laws.

Evidence also showed, according to the DOJ, that the BIR based the income-tax liabilities of the respondents on the documents obtained from third-party information and those obtained from government offices, such as the certified SALN for the years 2002, 2004 up 2009.

The DOJ added that the BIR also obtained a letter from the human resource officer of the province of Pampanga stating that “there is no available records on file of the supplemental SALN for 2002 and 2003 of Mr. Arroyo.”

Likewise, the Office of the Ombudsman for Luzon, in a certification dated April 12, 2011, stated that “despite diligent efforts nothing has been found on record of the 2003 SALN of Mr. Arroyo.”

In its complaint filed in April, the BIR alleged that the couple failed to file their ITR for the years 2003 to 2009 and underdeclared their income, resulting in a total deficiency income tax of P73.5 million.

The couple, however, claimed that the BIR failed to comply with the conditions for the use of net-worth method tax considering that the tax agency did not conduct any actual examination of their books of accounts nor did they observe the 10-day period stated in the checklist for them to submit the required documents or records.

But the DOJ held that the BIR properly applied the net-worth method of determining the tax deficiency in the case of Arroyo and his wife.

“The net-worth method is resorted to whenever the records and documents of a taxpayer relative to his declared income are inadequate and does not correctly reflect their true income,” the DOJ ruled.