CTA Case No. 2473 (Decision)
RT nr Rf IC OF THE .PHILIPPI. P.S < ol.RT OF TAX APPliiALS QUE.f.ON CITY - .c ..,� tX ' t 1" tur th. r i .n . t1 ( t y ~ i. ll- .~o . .cr p -t i n- n ot r . . :L :fo t t in t:h ' . . ' (f'f'l ~)~ .... v, . '~ ... ( }} ") �t ~ n- 1 '7, r '! {.'1 3 .. ,09- 6'7- 6 1 t 9 .. 6 �U I~
� � . l (. �� e. } t 1. r, h in th � ( ' � 35- 37 3 ' 765 er l t� te 7 1, 3' ' ! . p ~ti ion~ l t'lr.' s "' qu. e D1 � c- � ' l .i t' t .� Iy 148
�3 .. 9 c' .t - tr co t .) ], $t ,. ' ' "!' . ) n.l l s. c p1i bl t 1 th't ttl" �{ . ~, � ' 197� 1; �) > :t n v .. ~7 ~ at ~ l ?2 .t en �!" � t'i . . 20�- ""'7' .} � ".'. t � th
-t � 1: � l .. 1. i , ' $1 Pe ' 1 i.s e 1 �,h, t in t r h � 1~ ot" 1! s1 .. - ' f:l.d .l!t . ly \ i.e(} ' t ~ ly 0 .. ... 1 .h t zi h t t en ,f1) 150
;' o. 21 73 - 5" ... rr rn h drat . . ",.. ~ j lj Tlf! <9 . n...,em t n to t n(;J e .. onne t o.ev r c t n ot � ftLr � i nc; t h tt t is uo> tt r n til t 0 I f~ r ,.. ~ n t 6I' lett ' jn :i ., le~t "� >:I "'cllo� 1 d I)~ f. ' 1 " I cu s .� 0t s r ., :U""�" I. a Or' .� cons "� the r ., . .c: 1 " ..... v. 'l. 3 'l '- , ro r 1 , ") ~ \S 'a to ' ~p nt 1tio th�: ri th pl .. t . e- lJ '0 ;;;s s th ~( � v. �- f � > .. .11 .0 1 7,.., � r n� .v wr
:, ;; � - ' ... I t f' v h '11 th le 1 ' ttl . h t h p:ri 1 t ro f � 0 ll. l t . .,, u � ' \ � -l 3 l 3, ? c c� so I 1 6 ? 8 ~~ . ) r oi. t 1 0t t 1nol d sUe well witbi t el'i � t1 of r 1962 tb. -- 11 t it to be rot . tr t 1 l bl . l t I t . ev. lL -l 62 , .9 l 60 , 1 7 t ' p 1t1o th of co f th t 1 ' tbi 15 2
I �7 .. ? - t ' t () � � h 15, 77. 153
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.