CTA Case No. 4118 (Resolution)
~l't.J.8UC 01' HJE t'H.ILWP\N~t ~OURT OF TAX APP.r::.Al.S Q J~ON Clr�' GE E. MILL I CORPORAT ON. P e t 1 t i o n e r� - v r us - C . T.A. Ci\S NO . .118 c 1 . ' c 'M -1 )N �l OF -- - - - - - - �. l rr:.., L r:..V. o.l'Uc:�pondent � .- X r ~ 1 � ~ 0 LU "" i: lt rinq th t it1 n r i'" no lon in er t d in P\lr ui g its p al to his court :s in ic t d in t ,.M tion 0 J.th r w p t1t1 n or Vi 11 d on u t 1o. 1 7 on t ground th on n h v r bly ct d on pe 1t1oner�s r qu t t-:> c ncel s .,.n 0 fic1 ncy 1 � t x involv d h r i , nt r ng objection on t rt '> r on nt: Th -.. ur r o v r y d or. qr r tion. L t h t tion for r vi w wi hdr wn n thi 1r n in t d. ~ zon ~~ty. v tro � u 11 t 1 � 1 7. 1~ ~~ 26 2
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.