CTA Case No. 1127 (Decision)
UEZ P TLI 'PINES A~PEAL CITY � 11 7 t � r u� t 1 18 �' 27 0
- � 11 7 X ' 271
- � 11 7 f of Cu t �1 rr Co 1 on r Co 0 l 1 ly of b tt e1 0 co rc t 0 r 00 h 0 , th th h 0 1' rc 1 t1 rb �i r in h ti 1 0 p io r v J1 ul y ll 27 2
o. 11 7 oll 0 u 0 or t lo. 0 r1 n� lJ li t 10 f 1- � p w 1 1 r 111 1 t i ' h l c nr i oi l of rh �n n- 1 0 h ' rs� d t- i ' Pr 1 ly u ' 0 � t ., - in t 0 I t e tu - o1 �� l � 0 net uld t tl 0 the ,I 2'73
DECI ION - CTA C SE iO . 1 127 5 bul n. � g in th r port of th th r Bur u how that in the v ning of rch 24, 1959, th w th r ov r th Turtl Isl nd an vicinity wa r ir with th wind fro 3 to 5 knot nd th ooth to light . ( Of cour � p ti ion r con id r it n rror n th p rt of r pond nt Commis ion r of C to to 1 to con 1 r tion b c u th during th proc din b for hi � sion r of Cu t ' ting dmini trati ly in r vi of th Coll ctor ' d ci ion, 1 ith r bound by th t chnic 1 rul of videnc (Philippin Shipown r ' o. v � The Public Utility Co 1 ion, 51 Phil� 957; ao � Jur . 36- 37) , nor co tr 1ned by t ehnie 1 rul to th dmis ibility of proof (Inter tat Commere Commis ion vs . B ird ~ 1 9~ U. S. 25; 48 L. d . 860) nd 1 fr to f hion hi o n rul nd proe dur nd to pur u m thods of inquiry c p bl of p rmittin him to di char hi ultitudi ou duti s (F d r 1 Co 1c tion Co i ion v � Pott vil Bro d ting Co ., 309 u.s. 134; 84 L. d. 656) . Then gain , it m signifie nt th t p tition r ubmitt d th ir c on the b of th proce ding before th Collect- or of Cu tom of Jolo and th Commi sioner of Cus tom h n th y could h v nt r d trial inst d nd pr sent d th ir obj ction to Cour or pr nt d vid nc to r but am � Under th s ~~ 27 4
cDC - ~o . 11 21 c �' i 0 v1 no g 1. � a tt 'h t 1 ' th f.1 c1 ly 1 r s on. t' th t. on h t r or Ilot t ' 5 .o h 60 n 1 62 Y' n 0 th ot 0 ro � l 1 t c tr 1 o. 1 t d ,r l c ul r 7, nd rl 1cl �0 h 1. ol � 7, 9) , u ch r 0 d ot h v th ff the expo 0 of coin or not 0 r th 0 n v 1 h :) t t 0 0 t d 11 lly 11 th c ul .J till in or il 2 7 5
- �1 7 � f ' 0 1 0 � zc' , ;. 1 � ,. 27 6
More in CTA Decisions
- ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, (REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCE OFFICER, NESTOR H. VASAY) v. SORSOGON CITY AND HON. ROBERTO D. DOOC, CITY TREASURER (OFFICER IN CHARGE), SORSOGON CITY(CTA Case No. AC-90)
- CTA Case No. 5698 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 5698)
- CTA Case No. 5279 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 5279)
- CTA Case No. 169 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 169)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. ST. LUKES MEDICAL CENTER(CTA Case No. EB 571)
- DONATO C. CRUZ TRADING CORP. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 2573)
- PHILEX MINING CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 8371)
- CITY GOVERNMENT OF DAVAO, Represented by the Hon. City Mayor Atty. Sara Z. Duterte - Carpio; City Assessor of Davao Represented by Engr. Jaime G. Adalin in his capacity as City Assessor, and City Treasurer of Davao Represented by Bella Linda N. Tanjili in her capacity as the City Treasurer of Davao v. NATIONAL FOOD AUTHORITY Represented by: Ma. Theresa S. Villafuerte, Director of NFA-Legal Affairs Department(CTA Case No. EB 2691)
Want an analysis of this document?
Ask ASG Legal AI to summarize it, compare it with other rulings, or explain how it applies to your situation — it researches from this same library.