CTA Case No. 249 (Decision)
El'UllLIC OF TilE PHILIPPINEI COU.H.T OF TAX APPEALS MANilA e�t1t!on r . - - v r su c. o� . � 249 ~E a L l'b -- -- --- � ~ x� - - � ~ - pon � - Dc 1N Thi pp� l fr a c ' on f the s- ondent Coli ct r of ntc n a in f Q , th � t ~t on r Huporto o !llo h u f d 1 f ie ~ c , �~ :) t surch r e nd co lty for tho l� r nt lo lo C ty n f r r by cc tp t ight (8} tnor ch ldren to support , cr v d i � n� co ol 1 d a f! pond c e l �� t. � 1 51, e eo t X return . : h 4 (p. 2, frt ah 6 , .11. 9 . 1 ' expense cf fell (r��u�u���)���� ����������� ����� �������������� 0 pens �������
� r. .. � :<.9 - 3- d--f 1 .cy nee tax, sure r g nd co - !I Q J1 ~' � pro 1 � n l y f .r � t X ye r 19 ro ' follo ur n ���� �������������������� �� ���������� � ���� ���� �� This ce ' nt. OUit \.. � � �������� pon nt' th not n . y r po. d nt (. 2 , co h ) rr v d t ft r d 9 to n n P t�t � n r ' t X r turn t ollo n t n ������ � o, � � � � � � �� � ������ d ������������ Tot 1 � � � � � � � � � � � � � 0t of n rl ct tn unt f d by p t t X nh t hus v n 1 ~ , unt f 3 , 2. 9;:>. u st ted .I)U t, r t ct t t� f pt t G0 l hc t "'CUn tl src H\ c pen 1 y, ul tt unc ur � i culc ntion c tn - po nt cone hat p t n r, 0 1 ht ( ) inor ch 1 ,.. n � n i ot l :r on 1 ex ptio n cc rd !� 11 co. c d d 0 t f t Y. ~ ., 0 he ct o. appl c 1 c
� � f t 01 n of f c � eap n that t t on r n - ��1�� of � 100 gos� pro uced ls is p � 1- clare his � d , a\reord n ta ion of x� 1c1ency io � t tlontr cla o un ~ c;l � gr alas of OS d no ovudac l41l: penses. 23
c.,.. r"' z � 249 r -- o pro, � incorr c.tn ~s of h c.l ha un eel ~o h S grC!.8 1 o.. p figo t- t on r t f hot h u ht osn ... ... fry in pr11, � t t .r t f 10 . 00 r thou- aand. or tot 1 of 710. 00J h t t ...,..,. ~ tr nsport th fr loc � ht , o n 1 o. 1 h� o 6. ...o. t ot l c t to h t r II r � only ' ur i d� ot r of nc lt v t f. n ld onl �t 1. 0; tt 0 el g c t t {) or nt r ul r fit or t e n dr n t t hpon ot ll � e ' enc t no ff 0 p:r t ot cr t ./ v nc ~uc t ed on th re ult t b � 0 fry. " f pt r to Octob 1' & n � ut .r n fr 9 . 00 0 11. t � on h of per tho nd. 0 ff rt n � st t t fr, f pril o 1 cc pt d flclently sta l sh � 1 � f ct ��
tl. ne.r y f t re to itt a fy epte ror t ,.1 � n c y It ry c � t � ve 25
to t e i all ' a portlo o xp n of 21. r. , t to justi �� � ...n th � point. t tloner ou c: aion 1 th t of re�ponclen !1, - HI " aft ot 1 fry ,fo~ tf .... 26 :!J..
-- ' l> 28
More in CTA Decisions
- LEPANTO CONSOLIDATED MINING COMPANY v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9101)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. DEUTSCHE KNOWLEDGE SERVICES PTE, LTD.(CTA Case No. EB 829)
- CBK POWER COMPANY LIMITED v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 7621)
- CRESCENT PARK 18-2 PROPERTY HOLDINGS, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 684)
- MAKATI CITY AND HON. JESUSA E. CUNETA, IN HER CAPACITY AS CITY TREASURER, v. METRO PACIFIC TOLLWAYS CORPORATION(CTA Case No. EB 2217)
- CTA Case No. 3192 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 3192)
- ALPHALAND MAKATI PLACE, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9609)
- MYRNA S. LEONIDA OIC- REGIONAL DIRECTOR, BIR, REVENUE REGION NO. 12 v. MARY SUSAN R. FORTICH(CTA Case No. EB 1925)
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.