CTA Case No. 288 (Decision)
~- - , ' K~PUBLTC OP' TJtF. PHILIPPINES COURf OF 1 A.X lU!.PEA.l.J) M.ANll..A � � 1tion�~ la.~l .. - r u ~ 10\ � 4. � . 28 X� ~ � � � � ~ � � � � ~ I 0 � pea f o t d - on of the v� f or ton Cl t .o.r. I tio pu 1 c ct o. 141 � l� � . 1 ' ni a var �cle � �� II r .uf... ~cons a t ��d s crt appr ' l s h ch � 0 ice a � o pe� cue fl .1- r�ater po lon o s ~as or t1t1oner but �d tificat_o \. ol t. epublic c ft r n� 0 � except 7 le a of re over n y the � � ated arc 27, l9 6 . pon p 1, th a 209 :..~,
L' .. 2 - 2- J.a WI by the t.- ay to. 1 ~6. , ,.. the l att ttl� � lti u ftled t in ant � 1 trlal and a ant to i � e..lu on o c tl :rt � " 1) NJ:Jtr 19 , 1 :,) t n, ~h� ..!aed ~tlclet �er� sola t p lie ct! t of lch ale t � tu of ~. 2. w.t real r d aepoalted wlth tne S.�t c�!pte ot. ?29 �no 7" �- anua.ry 2 , 19!)7. he ooda r�l sed t p t�tl n tallt4 low d elu s: -�- -- .. --.. .. ... 2 � 222 tbe Ooda which were ae!a and forfeited t the ov..,..nt lcb contt1tute the ~Jtct attar of 210
� 288 -- ap~al ~� �� f llow�: a) 1, � � � �nu uate ove. 0 � n 11 ( tens o f nd ou ht by t�t on fr on kong �lle .1y 0 tion and f elittl' t!on to h.ta �� � ivea and rtencta ts � elea of ��1d � '" � c) .,W.l � c t :reaid�nt, u u t . o-c ll. no-doller-s- tt asia. th n four (~) ona f l lld ue � ollec ~0 st en la 1�- 110 � �t th t ey t �0 �n l us on � � �� � they fo c purp����� al y J.a � ..... � only �� � her� conce ns forfeit&ae o .a k loa of � lt lon � ahark' r . �� pze erv ve t bl��� ~l �� ec t!ons l. {c) and f epu 1 c o. 1 1 , 211
� - 4. 1". . � �� 1t t eo 11 e en t (n 1 re- es!d c~ of - ore , 0 1 ll p � � � t. 0 � the v 1 nvo v � ��� reel en t � oodo:~ "d 0 X� � . ~ 212
G. r�� -. t t\ f Qftel.. .8 f!eh, ied. f ! n� � ! sou pre er~ veg t bl � � fru n 4. to � ;j s ifi nt er w 1 e,. l � � o not only 1 1 c) h� yea:r of o.ttfl :tor&f at. ro g t for rcial pur ���� of the pr vt l e ant u r of H public a o. l-41 � � � ( � 1 f. ppe h itlon r a r a i n 1 5, h � trip 10 c . �� � u �� ' y of f. on �h � s, e i n c er 0 h r � . he tion., " r n ppl c ole o e evto u1c c ua s �� � provl o eonta n d 1n ~ c ion � o. eit a oner r !a the �l ht queat1on 1n their � (' h ou y uor o �~ ial purp eonten d n ehalf Ptt!tione:r ou h or 1� � x: 1 tiv s or o ua OQ of � !l ou Q o ht. for c;c;lllau�c;tal pu.r:p ���� cc w:-.E'td tn y r .. 213 �
E � 2U ... 6 - .1 i o. r us o ... .., id th Coil c or of s , � � 0 h t ! 1 ly e .. pend n h~s t 1 t t h ou d n ur h n t ! >: tons th l: nt tn y f or ! s r~on 1 con u ~tion i f ly t f or dl tr1 ut1on el t v��� .c t d 0 t t at a po.r on d 0d ~1 er' � !l:'OU t b , h h elat1ves. .) ven .r ht h 0 ~~ ng ~ ly or a
� - 7 .. f" 1 ~ 1Q ' 1 ta , h 1 p r ~t on than 11 - 0 tt ff n oth r rt1cl 1 t any one .. � he no-doll _,.. ltt ne and n UG of th"' pr � 1� ndoubt v1ltge con li' 1n1 ( ) t .tc; t!t . I . r � 1 of � tc:l t . �v no ti in e ~o . ,��1 � th� � f. it co ta � �tn�� p t.ttf.on � � in� � y� � 957. ani � - � 215
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.