CTA Case No. 22848 (Decision)
- ... .. � - ... .. .. r ... l J 0 y �� al 326
- n t - � ( tf nr c �� tv .. t �p � � 1 .. � 0 -
- (_ } p 1 � t 328
� L �� � 1 � ) l � in tfie - � ) in for } 329
n 0 ce � l"'. ,l c t tr ... 77 a p n "" t t � cl or - cl t t su 01 0 f � t� �( �� nee f 7, 1 5 dy l r i.) � l c � � nn t � e u a 0 1n c� t u t 0 c1 1� � ( � l � 330
- y ~ 1 7, 0 n1 t � 1 l 1 n e - pur - Qt �t c 0 �� X 3 �3 1
". 7 .. a 1 ( " 1� � t a 1. ( 1 � � 332
- t ... 0 t f c �- 1 at c 0 1 � v 333
� .. � ( 0 0 (
1 � c c l r � �� c ,, 33 5 y 1 Ut � 11 p �
t . � c ou () ) � 0 t c 0 0 - � � � �� � n � n � 1 1 0 I. y fc 336
c J. 1 0 t , � � 1 _:::;; (� � 0 u l cl 1 1 l 1 n J: ' - �J I y � � d r ( � � � 11 ct t nc c -1 � � c 0 tl 80 n �337
- � ) ce - .nc 1 0� ;I � ) 0 0 n 0 1 l. 1 1 0 '" n� � l'
J i h - 0 ... l 0 - s 0 t i in 0 � 0 Yt 339
-- X � 1� - t � � � i h 1 � � 11 - � 340
- - t f 1 - � n .. � J - of � - � 0 341
. .... ..~j c .... t.ax n -- ca ... ... �c y ~- ' tt'' ' . i t' no .L � ' 0 tt .. X ... y n h ne � c d n~ n . i ur n n r em (,( r il � T rr 1 cr- .rp n 342
- n e - - l 3 43
- -- tc 0 t � ,� � l r� 344
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.