CTA Case No. 245 (Decision)
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES COUl T OF TAX APPEALS MANlLA t 0~ I \ c� ~ t;. � � � � J.;J � � Je: -. -- t. - - ---. - - - - ! .... l 0 ~.., o..f.! � t .1 .. uc r. - , s :..l of p:r p i , 'r 4� ' hi"\ s .$ 12. ( f t 3 ,4~ 0 fiG X , 1, 19 l~"'a, ,1 -� t. d 1... 4i fo t d i f � t. t 0,:: r a... -... p tt c l il Cvi 1' i c ... ni t ... s y ,. 'l 56, 1 l0 177
>10. ,... 5 -2 ... y b. cou 1 or t spont.ent. $ d yt pr 1: u t o, 48, oll c f l "u tion as c.m i () ,1 �1 5 fo l . ,-. ~ 41, ,....:! . fte tit.i l -6. ' q t i $ d l.SP �t :., i re ..s $51� t n ht h 0 th n o_th � ~ to t sponde t , u ... hQ p f whot ha uly tl "" . ... l. t,;() 0 r 1* il" � tl. t oun 19., 1 7 . 7 � 9 6, a r ld ion $ ofi'~ an . on ns p � ..,. ~ l y '� s p "j F .oru ry J , 1~56 .. nd t puo c i;,h >ro}:J .rt ~ .iz d ci i -.rOll.> r rd� y , -~ y 26, l I....o,. . p ~tit:\.() ter ..: '1 11 , 1 56, it~ p i io 0"' R�V't! h Prel .m.... 0 l. i� is s n i ly fo tl+ 4 "" .......<J ~~ ..i i li . -1 � rnas. "C t& tho. c ~ �� t r0 n 0i s i l �� " ? 17 8
� -. in t ~ f 1 h 't t ri y to lv pro 1 t t1 t t" t 1 �� of sev 1j y rs n fiv ( } nt.hs ae QC> on ... t t : $ io<;o tax s d 9 in t et 1� rul j � ri jQri6p~ud c al tc t y s yt nt l {3} t e r :rn is al ri ci 1 ~n in ....>ecti.o 51 ) of t a o a long n o � g s, n l Vita v 40vrrun � h~ . ipp I'Ql nds , - hi � 2 2; oll cto cf Su � �) t l l .J. � !:''.). ~ .. '-'4 . , c. s . Po nt � r , c. ... n a �o' � � � ~> � r~},. "'< , nn � ..,. ... t . � .ch , c r l.:lt' i .. ,. No . L- 8 9. t ; P� ~ 'J�' � � \,. l c or.. �� � � .:a � . -.. � \.; ctor. .,. � f.J �; .. � c l t o � � � Cas � 11... 179
� c. ). ha 6 t ar. t :reeord do wt tur an i V"TY 1� al to tbe r , t a . s- t r t a 'r t 1� * c u t tn �Y .r st 1�,; it tio f:ror s id ~. e. undo t dly , t ut~o� G �1 ( 7) y. l' f.i {b � Ol th ,.t r a . d .� cc ly, th d l�vy \�a in �o... 1t t .h- ' eve. :. Co� .� 'tb >C t�on 51 u) of ha e enue ), t . � 4 :.. ' nt o:r th er . o col 't l. ....... � . ~ ht 1 Of! t:etion ... 2 ( ) provi e CIG L.o1�e s 0 f ary l r ''e ue t X h b hir. th pa i l i"t te til -cu :rs � h X ll�. ay co ec �au y s r 1 t "�Y 180
t y r. e l 1 � . f r :),.. 7- ~55 .) l .) ct on f t � 0 ) prov~ s
... 2 ..c:.:.,. -... 6 h � pi t 'I 0 oll v . 0 � t u. t� � nf -c ) � 1v d.l �� 6, 11 ,;,;.l" iS ha . "" t i ;;;# -f ' X0 r1 n ro 1 tak. a 'I fur r .... h .. r oi... lio ~ ie~ 5 e l at.. - �on is t 0 :26 , 1~ J l i.ti ' �j ....., , ~;;. 18 2 -
More in CTA Decisions
- CORAL BAY NICKEL CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 1269)
- UNISYS PUBLIC SECTOR SERVICES CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 1232)
- CTA Case No. 5358 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 5358)
- SPECIALTY PULP MANUFACTURING, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 7349)
- PHILIPPINE NATIONAL OIL COMPANY (PNOC) v. COMMISSIONER SIXTO S. ESQUIVIAS IV of the BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE (BIR)(CTA Case No. EB 587)
- ACESITE (PHILIPPINES) HOTEL CORPORATION v. LIBERTY TOLEDO, in her capacity as City Treasurer of Manila and The City of Manila(CTA Case No. AC-73)
- THE CITY TREASURER AND THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF TAGUIG CITY v. ROSEWOOD POINTE RESIDENCES CONDOMINIUM CORP.,(CTA Case No. EB 3008)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. MISAMIS ORIENTAL II RURAL ELECTRIC SERVICE COOPERATIVE, INC. (MORESCO-II)(CTA Case No. EB 2796)
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.