CTA Case No. 2229 (Decision)
1 Rl .f'"l'l~UC OF THE PHII.Jf>l)l�N.ES COl RT C1F '1 AX ..t.PP$AL~ QUbZON CnV n spond :t X� ~ � � � � � � � � � � �' � J.hi 1� a ap_.,. tll tro. ;r s ;GI.l.de t Comm1 , t iW~i at \ol.1U1S ~tl~:tit.ton r !! :: l� ten." tho ~l..'UU t �1�16;' l8t :;1s de icior-.cr ine.t)im$' ta.x Eor 96&, ' c.lu. itlg tnt ~~$'t tltG.l:'a u �tti.a ..e 1 ~~ eo..."pO~ati~ l Ol'&a:ie � tn l1pp~e~ w t.h plae~ f s n~~~ nn ot. tee <�, sa c.t th hC:lJ.. i outv,, l <nta. owl .... V'Gl'd> tal:lila. fJ1a fact� o:r: the co.c.e nro s.tQt~ 1n t a p t . 100 . 1l 1. , i,. 329
��V. 'fbs.t tht\ above dette1E?ll~1 incom t u as~c&ss~t ftJl'O$ out. of th plteati0n P1 tba re~pondent o~ tb.G' n;, co11,lo.rato� 1Ae011l~ t � Jtat If of "tv t7-t1ve pe.:rof!nt upon tbe 4'WOU t bJ whien tb~ ~ble .fi -t inootao dc$!1 A(lt x.ceed one l'.un.dteil thous 4 pa os 7 �atl.d. tld.l'tJ�fitre p~r �= � ce-rd.o upml tne ~oant b;r ''h1eh tbe t~bla n&t tnnom~ d$. ono hUrtdrad thoustllld peao.s� _,P .scrib J$tt. 5lt3f . wtth_� u.nde:-- nsilubJ.1c e_t t~ble tnco l"G$p(ltet to the net o( "t1tion r for til~ seoQtld lJi~estv Qf ,968J "Vl. hat p tit1on& is on a Ctll. u~ "/~ .-~ -a91s ~ttd it: eompt~:ted 1~� ineom ta 11ab1l1tJ ro. tb~ -e,nt:tr:~ ~- ~68 tanble yoa;r �on th~ btl.sia of tllG <)ld 0orpo:r� t� -~ rat.� 2'� Qf 22;11 and 30~ preserined tuui~: sec- tion ot the .tlt\tional Int~1,.nal n~�~ Code4 prior to itl ~maadmcnt l:JJ R publlc 1-ot �o. St+31 J �vtt. '!hat 1 . a lett~ dat 5an,df9p7r0o1topsttJotd1t1totn~o� :PrX"_odtptlr,Jl c-o-n- t gttGt cty !tM and valldttr af "*.he Sielid d.el:iq'f;l0.tlC.J' 1r.,eotle tax a.o se ,stllo.n.ts :COl" l968 & s .ald 1ett-e.r ot p:ro~st w&~ ftl~d :vith tbe otf:toa or th~ respondent on Atl&;U t 7, 19?0; ''VIll . ~l�~t r.;t;l.Ja!'pf o2n0d,en1'tP9�~1 1 na lattttr dated t V'hteb was r ~ 1v~:d by 'I a 1�t .1ono$' o..'"l M,rcb 1, 1971 , d . ,04 pe:t...tion ' s, abov1a pro� test and rette:~�ated tl'\Or~ill b.is ~~~.,nd fat' tho paym .. t o.f tJl�:t alle.Jild tiel.i.n- <~encr incom., ta,"t l1ab111t;; tor th. t~xat1lo 1~u 196:8 1ft t.b:liA amoun� or P41,16,..)8t :u u a �. " !�hf) sol isau i.n th1s cas 1& purely t~na o � lav, 1. o , vha't!l Ol'.' n()t t he 1nor sea rates o co;r orat income ta ;; C$.Ol1"1bad. in R.epublie ct to. Jft31, �wbicb ttm ded s et1on 2lt ot the 330
' � .- 7 1 331
in 332
� ,f &c . I..uJ � - ~:!229 em .. ~tr . 333
More in CTA Decisions
- CHEVRON HOLDINGS, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 8436)
- CTA Case No. EB CRIM-50 (Decision)(CTA Case No. EB CRIM-50)
- KEPCO PHILIPPINES CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 7628)
- COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. SKY CABLE CORPORATION(CTA Case No. EB 2305)
- UNIVATION MOTOR PHILIPPINES, INC. (FORMERLY NISSAN MOTOR PHILIPPINES, INC) v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. 9335)
- HEIDE D. PANGILINAN, in her official capacity as the CITY ASSESSOR, And FLORIDA R. OCA, in her official capacity as the CITY TREASURER, OF CABANATUAN CITY, v. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS (CBAA) and NATIONAL GRID CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES (NGCP) (Formerly EB UDK- 028)(CTA Case No. EB 2827)
- AVON PRODUCTS MANUFACTURING, INC. v. THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 1351)
- CTA Case No. 4894 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 4894)
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.