CTA Case No. 1495 (Decision)
\.l!':PUI'JT.IC OP' TU:E PBILIPPINEI COURT �.F T.-\~ AP~.EA.I..S UEZOO Cn'\' - - ... � �1 5 1 r' n � - � C) .. ., �t ). �
.. � r � l 0 1 312
t x o 1 t 1 .port~d eop .r 1re s t.r.- fo G~d n~u! tor � t' 1t1on r argues , th~rc;:f'o:t � th t� h 'Ull r its fr tlChis 's bread nd l ""'e br e1n tn inC-1:\td _ Xfl ptio ~'e titton r cant tr t!l c p&~ tin� t a Dm-11 e in tb t -e mt"\t1on grant und r F ra r pb. 9, Part 1 o, of � c lo. lt 4 o h .. 11- p t1- 1tion 1 li 1 d ooly or ta aild th r pu 'l1e pl c � I nd necesf'Jar indus riee xe pt1.(Hl trom h c~ tens in x. lt ~h tlld no equ 11 e l~$ 1 fer- ~ueb, talt 1 t � '0 pt1o. d.er $ id .r 111 lH)1 c � i! 4 of th or f.;�:, ss:fcm. 19\. is ~ bl"O- der in Gecp, than h tax...exemption r.o 1sion ot . r-*J1llbl1c :.ct . o. 9C1 . .a 1n><1:� te tha lot ~t-1 tioner i not q,x nwt fro tb~ oomten tin t .. en c:.op }f!r w1r -. , transtcrmer nd in!iulator i tJor a by tt, to 11 e wttb th or this ~c par 1 . a a th 1l j su � t:r eh1 th ,, 3 j_ 3
314 <;� .
1 - �� � j 315
... � 1� 1 ' 7 316
d� .r 1 ... 1 - ' tt 1 0 ' 0 l r 1r r to Pr '1 8 i �� -0 -.t e:bo ld b s j rd ' i th /~ -~ U tr1 i � bC'I c !on tl 1 317 .
(v 11 -C a �r 12 1 $1) . �- io l �., 0 ' 1- n r. � 318
More in CTA Decisions
- PILIPINAS TOTAL GAS, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 7863)
- PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATED SMELTING AND REFINING CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 6538)
- INTEL TECHNOLOGY PHILIPPINES, INC vs. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 6128)
- PILIPINAS KYOHRITSU, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10463)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. TRINITY FRANCHISING AND MANAGEMENT CORPORATION(CTA Case No. EB 2010)
- COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS and BUREAU OF CUSTOMS v. DOLE PHILIPPINES, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 1142)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. UNITED CADIZ SUGAR FARMERS ASSOCIATION MULTI-PURPOSE COOPERATIVE(CTA Case No. EB 846)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, REVENUE DISTRICT OFFICER (RDO), COLLECTION OFFICERS OF REVENUE DISTRICT OFFICE 57 (RDO-57) BI?AN AND SAN PEDRO, LAGUNA v. T SHUTTLE SERVICES, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 1565)
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.