CTA Case No. 551 (Decision)
��� . lf1~' I ��� } lill I �1 - - i - - .. - I - -- e 1 - n1 � c � 1 0p v 67
� cl -- i� 1 ce � � � 0 1 �� - f 0 n ( - 1 ( �1 - �0 �- o he 1 a- v - - � f . 68
- � 1 - i� ll t n i n1 1 Vi f n � i 1 ld!n ~ (d) of t � �� f 1 � 1. w a 1 � f inc ax 1 i� �1 1 � r I� �� � � � ca ci 16 tfr t is i ns ti � I eci io ap is d1 hi i cp -� h 1 t0 1 in � t f ct - I � c �� p 1, �� 0 t n i t 11 u � c 1 a v - a � c ��.) ( t, t ( (1) v 1t ~~ 69 '
� n ~y n -~ h 1 � f - 1 t l' 7 0
l -- i � - I �� � � c� 1 n � - � i a � �- 17 .1 n i� -- - - - jp :'
� -- � 1 it n � ~in � p bu n. dn i the - ti � i in 0 n ff e 8 of - � ( () 1 3, -
' - � 1 - i '�f 8 � l � s n f ih � 2�1 � I c �1 � l~ 73
More in CTA Decisions
- CTA Case No. 3486 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 3486)
- FIRST TELECOM PHILIPPINES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 10486)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. HENRYVILLE, INC.(CTA Case No. EB 2531)
- SUMITOMO CORPORATION & FIRST PHILIPPINE INDUSTRIAL PARK, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 6364)
- CHEVRON HOLDINGS, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 1508)
- PHIL. GOLD PROCESSING & REFINING CORP. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 8856)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. WESTERN MINDANAO POWER CORPORATION(CTA Case No. EB 2449)
- CTA Case No. 2020 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 2020)
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.