CTA Case No. 2197 (Decision)
REPURf.TC CF TUE PRTLIPPlNEB CnliRT OF T:'.X APPEALR QUEZON CiTY � . . T� '� A , ... � -.. �2 L - --.. � � p,f, rt /* s~ X nl i � n� � � ic l r .
. �� � f .Ol' l:l$dla l raall�O~, c iv u � ,, M,.. .... l "' r,..! .~ ~,.'.,i.'....... v_. t � � �� w "'"' Ualt a &t rt � s ' t.n Jl ion c y 1� Q .. v .... �c;;.;6') 1 y ,,t~ dw :>outlet f'""""" t Q '&J: c;r� th n.: d.e d on riarc 27, �11 d ... �en;,-JO � (Jfi 't r t s X 1 t; .r ent ' !l.~ ' rs.r n'< !;' ci " M tic .mt G�. .no.1do V~r ~.t. i 9!oc ��opo -nd f rr ai trat f o,. 1 70t Q fl :l i' 29 8
- - -. -- - . - - - - � - ~ � - p~ "~ - t.a..x �� .. -~ -..- 1,33 ,132.25 stnt~ subJ�ct to tax - � � ~ �-- �- � iP
- . . . - - . ~ - �. 6~ - ,.~., ... ./ - - """........,..,.~_.:.;.~.�.'..".... .Ult,185.12 5'9 f3J �.5; �5 .-r .. 0 � l ?, i' 30 0
� 19? l doas Q ""'Ol"i� part Of s1 on etitianer ' s t�s I ccounts (3) r2 l1 �. \� 3 01
1n:el ood :tn 1 s gro~q~. .r,tat 1n oe iOn a ot t!' t. Co e , � ions or hie s rou " r es " ir t ...ri t :.ne .~ ... r 1"" -fli Y� v� min�o a 1" ... t!latt the l,j<:) \o ~ $ v Pasa s.s , �2 r l { # ~ ... r n l .' et 10~ .S.Jt) . er ,. OlJC �( 'V 0 .ret~ y of' th n ...�.l!" � ~t', f_;, 302 I
( 0. t l
� I ca d ..., .o � ~' aj ~ .. .e .' ... 1 r is i't iv , .. :J + ! in i ~ . lf c~ ..... 304
t o. lb~l it th H�� ~.r net � co. "' lifo~� ,. 305
1~ ddu ed by h i- h t ., la � X sident of th Phil ppin ar I 7. n on t f l Ni f a fl lyt ;~ 3 0 6
11 �
.. 1 hou�e� et7 e ; L ouao c:~ 308
' 13 Tho .ty ni of � icil i � call p .in n h t .!l': t rj :ta n iea y ne 1 1 c l n J:i.g $ ll 0 l ~\ hly et'J n � tax fl f ei tl (J$ UpO$ a. the � itttinc ion (lf\ y t e d .:e n m 'Y 0 int nti , they rr a b sh m t h ,v n ~1�~-c~o,c:.�;f=.~01.;r�~~i~dso.t:wn::c:n:8.=:n.t:.h~iei.~d~::::::::f~a~.:e~::~:s:.:::::;..c. ., 7 i hf t ) 0 � he t and if inte dec o � no � lu7; e~i . d).
� l1 l , i ~ conflic ng o $ Gf d� ue d I u, o by ' ~ppo ing f..'l& ti w co n hat th osk.ln � 1 & f ti 0 u y 26, r noi o. 11 n QO th. t h � ;o, in � fitaolisn til .. I f'o tp ' h . ""' 1':1 +-o J - 1 i . pin h - 1 d l� Th ,.�ni.L. .>f.! ne! is r . cskin 1 do:nio11 �� enoi e. t is is, el6l: ~:ly ,._io;li:W~~......~..._....,........,.f� lo pn c - t J'n uary l ,,. l9 , tlttt-.r iv n �nd e 0 r 7 y a s. h X � �ill n. � .� Oll9 ot 1 � .;;.....:LO~:.;..: � du � ng his lif tim i to the 'ni �ed ._,t te s nd, aft :r <u;t stint th re.. .. i , t inv a iabl � uxn t h hilip ;ina 310
l EO � _ .Y i 'i . y OU.li .r; i d . Jap " cup � n �� .I 11 n1 � ln J fr 0 l h 1� i� o'at ng u � ol te c~ � ' r , ' Qc l J an 311
� 197 � 1 1 J � 1 � � � 7
- 11 � � � h lna � 1 � 0& nt n � 1111 'hi� unfl. ._. sJ. of � � � � 1 eta � f c be O.t n cp I f 7, t't �c e �� l � . i11 �� f en ieo 1 � X 1 h$ ys1� by ., i � h � f � h� c� 313
1 � ~ 197 l ci n i " ' � tb f c111t � m t h1 11 t b� It ' l� � �� �� t � � a r� 0n e c 0 � �� ' l. n � . -0 X c h � H i . c l. 1 314
lt nq :t1 . f 0� � y Pe th of ... i � (.P .c ss t. � � � . n.) fu.r\b �tifi 1 � r J -l,c: timon 0 e .r ly i� ~ qu1:r pJ: ~ , eh� � . lev J. X & .b . rc ic l i y.� is i~ � t ea � t 0 chnic li l s. 0 i � 11 ). -- -- __, .. !~ 315
n. � 1n 'to .... ti 14, 1 - 1 � l l n ;,; !Cil �ust 'CIV .t fe ..e J. i � e ~ re � ..... il ec hs l I� tll � n. ii~ pin" .s fo e, s ~ � on J n&. y """� l '7 n c s ... at: c.nd yt 0 � at v 1 a�. 1 lly !�' 316
t � t 1� ' ��
' '. ,, � � �� � � 1� � � ll i !u~i � � �� � i' 318
�. t P50 o00 � � "8JI �1 � ' 1. 0 � �� � ci � � .. � ; .... 319 r
( ,, 320 '
� � ~~ 3 21
More in CTA Decisions
- GLOBAL BUSINESS POWER CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10500)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. MANULIFE DATA SERVICES, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 1057)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. WRIGLEY PHILIPPINES, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 334)
- THE TABLE GROUP INC., represented by MR. WALDEN CHU, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 11091)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. GRAND GEO SPHERES CONSTRUCTION CORP.(CTA Case No. EB 2778)
- LUZON HYDRO CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9187)
- GAMESA EOLICA, SL-UNIPERSONAL PHILIPPINE BRANCH v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVNUE(CTA Case No. 9668)
- AUSTRALASIA CYLINDER CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 6269)
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.