CTA Case No. 2560 (Decision)
r RF ' 1li.IC OF THI'~ PHILIPP!~ ~ S COL RT OF TAX APP.ZALd Qtlh:ZO.N W'�Y ; t �� -~ -- - -- ~ - - - - 1- t t s l (.! .t� of" i � ot spa 1 il r jJ t ... tipu "' t t ollv ���: I il, l. 7;.t.t � t1 ti vn~u� r ~~ 83 .'
( ' ,t,; . � w li I 14 , 97 . 00 n\ <'.! � �ne i,;i(;1-
-� � v. ll l
\. . a ta tl. b a ei 1 n; T 11 l w iet: is p t s. � p ".U.U. r ., l::a .h� th r u , ,..a 1 ~ l rr W'l\l l T!!!' lli.nr r J: 'J. !.fi 1! �~ . cl r 1 r �p 86
) 1 �' J. . l.t~to . � v .. � .,. s t. eo- t a1 :. ' h. i io tt(i J" 1 � p ~us. toms Court t at ;~ 87
�.C a� �r C � ;r- t :r:ttt e.x �:t.cl.�e ~baraet 0 .� 1% ,. t aap u wtU pu t r l"t ol mn ' it � uutt up 1� t 1 �r �� n f t 1 t.r .ir,h r t c. t t ' :J.a 1 CA u.c .1 ' �� r 1t l ~� c. l . $ (; "'� ~� ,l, .Uut. t r flG p:r~ 1 0 r 1e ' p o tiler p\.1 po �� .kl� it: 1 ht r '(l la or it . c tr l ('l' t l c., . 1'J Co. � � u. �, 9 lt '" S
- � 2:.~ 1. r� ' pl r' � 01 � � � � 1-. 1 ~ , 97 ~ , , rt l .. 11 89
Ft� t t -t n n c r n ty . .- "', ::tlol � � 1 f th~t 1I c ll uc .. UG 1t.:-l t.h(;..ut ny as ur�.ne or @;UAl!l"l o" n t h top- .:a�n y. ... 1f:f" !� 90
- tb 1 ou. u. ace~ ll:. w t cou � f t � e - ~' 11'.1 ~ t 1o o 1~ .or. is y .~t t-1 n 1'� 1 � ' .t.: . 1 t . <:h . tte ly .vr �t~l"' d fozr in' ll~tr:tal use cannot be a ~.ide:rec itti" t onder }.'~rif.~. ~ra di.ut~ o. 0� . , du - in o:r "' ttl t 11 l,!!t ll e<1"1 r a ifio t ~t 1o.n: ' lt cl; 1 u, tlO e o; e z: ~ .r'l!l elauae l! a1r.r u �0 tht\ . wnie. la 1 t t'l at. <it � in , n t.ttr . t 0~ J.t ti pl ilv b c� . .u.� tJJ ._f!f,LfS:]l!Jl' . �1 ..,-~s r tiv ca <:< :1rJet.1on b ti'l 't.be $,fiUJI 1 - .1 d; ' k or eoo Otl tbe ans r pti n thu 7 ~..ml'!'!n, n 't\Ui i r to �A t �. . # 1n1 1ot o �. 91 �
� n � �0 t 1 pr fJ f:,l te' �u � ( � 1. .... ct . ) 1'oru� t , 'l a:ritt .1 n No. � t � n: l :P . ad ' '. dr1 t er:; 1tl.e � � CC$ .. ." 6 ery .$1 p rlance at plf a oo � 'J;o , nt 1 1 t � l 1ft ~a.s ifl d tor pi.ttpo;.,a_ e~ ,.,ond. nt. lJ. l!. .J.f g v � ne p .ra . apb � l 11'\:rtiel � t i t ) :t.�ties av��l! t! ~;he r -e~cnd t , J"~ � �u=) lAlms Ta � sion c. cu � ;?.,�7 U~I:.C J i 2l�, l':i7l , ~ 'rut t .lf i.tiCb. i � w t or o �t -r srding No. o; . c i ( er Rec"'"J~a) . 1 tO � eli: t ~he t brrr . Hv e, t r ..1,;;,~; 1 kn ri . .1S 'or 'If � ~ Ty y tr� at w! j( ~ h.~ a.t or 1"'1 h ~hlp t e me ~~f lmpo.r.:� ta .101 � i' 9 2
l tt a f, i.} 't ...,. JU l' 1 lea p :t.�~ t ~ ' . 1 -. h { a. . 17;1 0J-I t. ' ~ 'j � 1 'fi '' \'/"". \.. . 'I ti.t-!1 I f) � t:. .;~ � <, J y . .J t . Q';/' l , c U11C ly tr�.l . t i t ,~ r P"t') ''l: % .:::. v ... �� t t r at k: e :.~ ' Je 1 ... �i L)&J:'ll'l, :;,t h.!UJ. . be t ,.., r t.,. '..f� (. 0 ... .t! 1 � 93
t.~ �;.C: (�.. ��i ... ' 1~f-_,<. !ij t'; "�':...~ ~"~""1~- ,; .., ,...., w 1 el Y� z� C- ' ls tor r ' ' ,)lJl .u.s t r. � 1� ."' � ' 1 ~n ' l' " vt�d ot' \.h1:a ' (,; .;:. ( u~a;t.. fl..!i " iJ.�y ' .!" . .t. -n '�V h !li: wtJ i � vu11 Jx~<' iC JI,.� e t . .nt J .'. , 94
c t t bl � fv v 11 .rl.t � C1 io r re � t r t .I.U.;. � () .t - eu t � � � &l t ' ~~~ :..1 in e ~~~~, ~-!~ :' 9 5
More in CTA Decisions
- INTEL PHILIPPINES MANUFACTURING, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 6263)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. TOLEDO POWER COMPANY(CTA Case No. EB 321)
- KOKOLOKO NETWORK CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9574)
- CTA Case No. 620 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 620)
- CTA Case No. 5449 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 5449)
- JEANIFER P. AJOC v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10642)
- PHILEX MINING CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (consolidated with CASE NO. 7014)(CTA Case No. 6892)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. CORAL BAY NICKEL CORPORATION(CTA Case No. EB 1735)
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.