CTA Case No. 2595 (Decision)
.' ... � � --- -- ....... ~ � ~Ita/:;-:;_ c ;I ly t.t � t: � r y ooll u. t;: �h - i r iv i � r u. 1'0 0 it 1 v r� h of. "" l 2. 1 ::>5 � 0 1 Cl: .o X � 1- r � h i n cr. c 3D7
2 -- � r n n n � 1 7� � - n � r c � a 398
- .5 ... h -
� -
-- - -- � � 2 ,. � � 71 . 401
- .. ... -
- ... t't v. � 97'l; " l - .... :.>7 , 77 . .'"' 403
I. / - ...
.. ... / 1 0 � � � � .n 0 - l � 1 - � - "� � .n 1 u c n n 405 l
�s f ... ... t y �t h h co i . o n va. u _ l �,...ti n c n in o i 1 f Of 1 �n i � n 0 visi n in tr ctiv Jy 1 t...i .l.e � il in h.t .
. ;; �� - 1 ... 1 � r. h 1 In l C 'i. .u ,. � t 1 9 � n ll t' n n n1 � r ,_ �o -J t � () lu {} � tl t in ~. n , n. 0 OV n� y t r c c n C::t..,l l '1 ""0 ,
� 29 u ' t.5 ec vu 0 1d ly r t 0 0 n nc le � c s .. rn or � 1 � 0 1 1 0 r th� 0 � u ... 1 If � i �C i 1.:> n of q �- A... 08
.. 5 -l - or " 0 un 1 1 n ... r1 1 n ,�'
-~ -l \ lie. n Q n 0 s i ni f:Ot l~ I �.ccu f c ~'" n.ro 0 - 0 h basis n 'c 1- rtl- ll m 0 t .... � cn tp n� s e r ~ �t. tn n ~r ot '1 � 0� . . ( ' n ct u0 r .n t 410
� , ... � - � � - 0 4. 1 1
-' I � 259S - .... h ch n rt un p:...r th c nt.r �1 ani<: 110r t � ur~~u () t. l 0 the e . ��n ~x: the Ciw i l p in "'e � only (:;r i m to the on- n . y t.h � n co t;r;��ct. th. orn in min, t t camo 'l' .o � o g - oun to t:F o c n.nt h r-;� it 1""' h r� 1 a. .. i �oos . :i... n o �h - of o.ne party or lt n t-:.h itn" t: n_l bur- h r. 0 ~ .ns u on f l.� ..~B./4. h ' ):'":; �n. ' f the ..her l-. 0 "' no im air he bli at ion of con... � tr. """f\ . (L n.ul r V' �� �ch� ca G,E)*l'!''t' nco nd �uhlc � ,o- ion;:,� . lf.l Ph l:<fi1: . ;,h lio 1i.n~ � Ja u y .. n�u wn e c V!i! � udJ. ....ene""i)l . ....-1 92 lB, l s. :?.2 c !\ 13~ ~ ) Nev r l J.0 j, . t ion~r uld t;.n - e- . 1 �t t f1Ct": 't� . j '-:.C 1m 01' t u l ft co ��r f . in h.n t l i3<:JnK i culut' 412
- ;) . v0 e � - 7) 1 t- 0 in n �0 0 n 1c t. 1 t ,, u� a i � cac io ,.... s n vi e c .. v n 0 ( u. y u 0 tl hr tn %n y l p i ' 1 t "9 0'Ci ie 0 � t l y t he. 0 h no i t 413
- -- i tL t. t ll � l l d c ti u m�
.' C... I - I c i0 ' ti n g n~ ly l r 1: j h- 1 t h � X 0 ih 0 f (>!'.: c h in u - n ... 1 tr 1 1 'o n xi n t 415
� 1 r � t on' � 1 0 n COtl'J r i �. � 1 t �� t th c ion t - 416 h i {
- .. - 21 - ). t th ,, 1� n n h en r n� -, c t r 0 r n 'II - h v nl In . n I 4.- ' -n u , � 152 '� ,. t- i � 1 1. � ll r1 r nv l /( r t. 1r. � � ..h .0 1 l. � J. l' � n t� 13, 7. I /
More in CTA Decisions
- CONTINENTAL MICRONESIA, INC. - PHILIPPINE BRANCH v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 213)
- ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 157)
- OCEANAGOLD (PHILIPPINES), INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10543)
- PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 588)
- FIRST TELECOM PHILIPPINES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10688)
- EMMANUEL C. O?ATE v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9498)
- METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 6516)
- CARMEN COPPER CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9543)
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.