CTA Case No. 4246 (Decision)

COUHT Ill' 1 r.,y APPHALB BAY FOOD SPECIALI TIES, I NC., F'eti t i o nr,�r- ~ - versus - C.T.A . CASE NO. 4246 COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, x - -� - - - - Respond nt'. .. - - }{ o r= c I 0 , .... Th is is a peti ti.on 'for- review of the Febr�uary 10~ 1988 decisio n of res po ndent denying with f i na lity pet.ition et-' s p t.. n test of the July 16~ 1986 d e�f i C: i enc y in CC:Hll!? ~ S <"l 1 e r; r:md expande d Wi thho 1 ding t ax assessments t otalling to P1~665~934.97 covering the periods of 1981 and 1982 . The r e levant material facts are not disputed. Petitioner was a corporation duly organized under Philippine l aws wit h principal office at Cabuy ao~ Laguna. Its corporate existence was shortened to October 31 ~ 1985 by v irtue of an amendment of its Articles of Incorporation duly approved by the Secur iti es and Exchange Commission on November 5, 1985. (Se e Anne:-: "A"~ p. 9 ~ CTA rec. ) That even thoug h already dissolved 304

( DECISION CTA CASE NO. 4246 -� 2 - petiti oner st i l l f.i.Ir:�rt '� l,p instant petition for review p t.w sua n t tr:~ S!~~c:::t �. nn 1 7'2 o f thP Corporat ion Cod e whi c h pr-ov i. d~ ~;. I I',, I. 1. i �fe of the corpora t ion i s e:-: t.end E> d ro r�� t h ree y ears after the t ime 1-<1hen i t wo uld h ave bf"~'?.n s o di. sso lved for the purpose of pro secu tinq a nd d e �f e nd i nq s uit s by or a gain st i t an d of en<!l b l i ng i t g radu~ l.ly to set tle a nd close its aff airs . (In re Voluntary Dis s olut i on o f Union Gu.:H��tu 1ty Co . ~ C.A . ~ 37 0.8. ~ 4 5~ Marc:h 2 ~ 1939. ) On ,Ju l y 24 , .1. '-i'B/,, r� R ' i1 :iC\11�? 1'- rc;-ceiv ed a demcC\ nd 1 et t er�� and asses s men 1: no t ices bot h d ated July 16 ~ 1986 issued b y r espondent a l l eged ly for deficiency i nc ome~ and witht1olding taxes for 1981 and 1981 in the total a mount of P1~665~9 34 . 97 ~ summar t " P.rl br l o w : .:t9Ht De ficiency I ncome Ta x �� �� � ���� P 467~951.52 Defici e ncy Expanded With~ 2~817.99 h o lding Tal-: ����� ���� � ��� Defici e n c y Sales Ta>: �� �������� 307,224.74 1982 Defici e n cy In co me Ta x . . . . . . . . 519~857.76 Deficiency Sa le s Tax � � � � � � � � _ ___ _._;!~ELS!!=!.:f.!'.-9_l.?. T o t a 1 ���� � �� � �� �� �� � � � � �~~~~!..~~-~-~?.. On August 1, 1 986 ~ pet itioner protes ted the assessment and sought for� i. ts re consideration. In . 3(1~

DEC I SION CTA CASE NO . 4246 - 3- t "m i nst a nces , p etition er se n t t wo su ppl e me n t al letter s of pr ote st, one d <" tP d August 6, 1 986 a n d another Octo be t~ .1. '1-. 1 ';,-)( +"' r-es ponden t in !bu pport of the ori gi n a l nrot~ G t. Dn t1ay .IJ l ~ .1'1f.3 7 r r'r� l .:lt io nP.r- r eceived f r om r e spon d e nt a 1 et te:>r d ,-,, t~:?ri A p r i l 8. .t 9B 7 r ei t e rati ng h is dema nd f or t h e o f the a lleged deficiency sal es in t he amm .mts of P 3 07~ 22 4 .7 4 f or 198l ~ n d P3 68 ,08 2. 96 f a r 1982. Howev er, wi th r espect to the income a nd withholding asp e ct o f the p e titione r was reque s ted to submit tn t iH? Bur�eau of Internal He vP.n ue C~ d d .i t ion a l den Ill .�,1 1 I ill' 't �?'1 idP.nce i n order to f u l l y eva l uate thr> i ~i ' :l t P '-, .invol vf?d in this ca lbe. On t'lay 26, 1 9 (-r/ ~ rmti t i on e r f i l e d with t he Nationa l Aud i t Review Di visi on o f t h e BIR a letter dated Ma y 2 0 ~ 1 9 8 7 i nio rm ing th e Burea u of i t s avail ment of the ta :-: c"Hn n l-!st y t tn der� E:-:ec u t i v e Or d er No. 41, as amen de> d b v E ::f?c u t i ve Ord e r Nos. 5 4 and 6 4 co v er i. n g its i n come a n d bus iness taxes for the y e ars 198 1 to 1985 ( See Ce rti ficate of Availmentp Anne H " K", p. 2 9 , CTA re c. ) and the cancellat i on CJf the assessments i ssued o n July 16, 1986 w.as r e q uested. Thi s wAs d en i ed in the letter of As _sistant Comm iss i oner Ime lda L. Re y es dated 306

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 4246 . ,IJ. Octobe r 9 ~ 1987 stat :i nq t h a t si nc e t he assessment was issued on July 1 6. 1 98h or prior to August 21, .1 986 the avai lment of t he tax amnest y does not c a ncel the asse s'!"> ment ir:-s u e d prior to August 2 1, .1 9 86. On November 2 5 ~ 198 7 � ~ati tioner again wro te t h e Bun:~"' t t h r u Ass i ttil\nt Commissioner Imelda L. Reyes quPstioning the i nterpretation placed upon ExecLttive Or der No. 41~ a110 a.mended. alleging thcat t h e E>:ec:utive Ord er me--rle no refe re nce to the exc l u s ion of t ~~ as s es smFnt R issued prior to August 21' 1 9 8 6. No me n t i o n wa s mad e in the exc eption as provided und er Sec� ion 4 elf said E::ecuti ve Order. Since it has complied with the legal req ui si tes of the amnesty gr� ant ~ the July 16, 1986 assessme nts s hould be cancelled . Finally on Ma r c l 1 7~ .1.?88 ~ petitioner received r�e spon den t ' s �f i n a 1 d r.rt� ; r~ i '' 11 1 '" ted FabrLliar y 10, 1988 r�e i t erc\t.i.ng hir.; dema nd �fc>r t h e p ayment of the t o tal a mount of P1 ~ 66 5~ 9 3 4. 97 P ~ ~~F i ci ency income, sales and expanded withholding taxes for 1981 and 1982 . Petitioner now appeals to this Court. On the ba is of he pleadings, petitioner s ubmits this c ase for decision. Us The o nly issues pre e n ted to for resolution a re as follows :

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 4246 1. vlh ~J �I h Pr n r nc�t the immunities rP.si\J t i ng from "V <' i lment of the t.:n: amnesty und e r E.O. No. 41, as amend ed, applies only to t axP.s � assessed afte r Augus t 2 1 ~ 1986; an d ~-~ . V.Jhethetr� n r� not the deficiency f :v- t ua 1 a n d/or legal asse~sme nts have bc;~ s i. s. ln t he de cie.i o n un d <? t � n?.vi-:w ~ r-�e s pon dent. is of t h e impression as statRd in Revenu~ Memorandum Order- No . 4-87 that p e i-:i t.ioner � s avai lment of the tax amnesty under Executive Order No. 41, as amended, did not result in t he cancellation of the assessments issued on J uly 16 , 1986 since only those assessm ent s is s u Pd a f t er~ August 21, 1986 can be cancelled. To ho 1d otherwise, would resu 1 t in t he retroactive, .i.n st~;'ld of prog; pf:?c t .i ve, a ppl ication of the l .:n-J (A nne:< "J", p. 28, CTA rec. ) � Petitioner c oun"t pr�<:;; th a t respond ant 's ruling and interpretat ion of E >~r-> cu t i ve Order No. 41, as a mende d ~ i s e r ro neou s . n y t: he very na tur~ of the t ax amn est y a nd by t h e ti tle of Exec utive Or der No. 4 1, as amended by E x e cuti ve Ord e r No. 64, to witt "DECLARING A ONE- TIME TAX AMNESTY COVERING INCOME TAXES, ESTATE AND DONOR ' S TAXES UNDER TITLE I I I, AND THE TAX ON BUSINESS UNDER CHAP TER 1 I, TITLE V, OF THE NATIONAL INT ERNAL REVENUE CODE , A$ AMENDED, FOR THE YE ARS 1981-1985" 30R

DEC I S I ON CTA CASE 0 . 4246 - 6- i t on 1 y s h olt-IS t hat. the ta ' : a~ mnesty gr-ant shoul d be ~)i v en r� etr- o active ;appl i. c c?i:ion as the tax amnesty cover-s unpaid income and business t axes for the y e ar-s 1981 - 1985. Als o~ nothin g was mentioned in the e>:cepting pr-ovi sion . u nder- Sec tion 4 of E>: e cutive Or d er- No. 4.1.~ as amended, that assessments issued pr- ior to Aug u s t 21, 1 9 8 6 s h all b e e x cept ed fr-om the c:: ov �~ra ge of the t ax amnest y decr-ee . Fol low ing t I H��. �- "1 ~"' "e:-.pr-e->sr,. i.o un ius es t "':-:c lusi n alte r-iu s "~ �� n e x ception, r.-o >:r.: l. �.1den other-s , e:-: emp ti.nn, or s a v .i nq assesE",men t notic es .iss11ed pri or t o ?)uqust 21 ~ 1986 being not one of t ho sP. i nr: l uded in t he e:.<c:ep t i on un d er Section 4 o f E:<e c:u t i .ve Or- de l~ No. 4 1, as a mend ed~ the r-easonab l P C: 'J nc 1 us ion r� eac hed is that th i s is no t an e >:c:eption to t he cov er- age o f t h e ta)( amn esty pr- i vileg e. Thi s is nc>t. a c- ;'l � �;r:~ �Yf f i r�st i mpr-es s ion . In t.he n~c en t case of . o . �,. AUTO PRODUCTS PH I LIPPINES, INC. v. 'THE COI�tMISS IONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, C.T.A. Case No. 431 8, Au gus t 20 , 1 9 90, thi s Cour-t has occasion to decide and rule that th� p r- ov ision under par .agr-aph 1.02 and 1.02.3 of Re v enue Mem orandum Ord P r 4 - 87, which sta tes t h at a ce r-tif ica te of ava .i.l ment o f the ta:{ a mnesty is a 30~

DECI SION CTA CASE NO. 4246 -- 7 - c;;;uf ficien t basis for t.he canc el l ation of assessment notices and l etters of c1e mand issued ~J't;.!l.C l:\1,\...ID,l_~_t. :?..l..L ...._.:1<!.~..9.. for the co 11 r,~c t.l.on of income~ businesll, estate or dono r-�' s t.al�:"' ~; cluE' dur ing th e s ame t .al{ab le years, is beyon d the c:; r. n p !? of the s t atute . grantin g t h e t;:u�: amn esty~ per-tinent portions . o �f 1t1h i c h r� ec?.ds a s follows: "The in tent of the given legis la tion, as always~ is telling. A readi ng of this E'>(ecu�t .i .ve o rde r gi v ing amnes ty sho~~s the-- p erio d covered January 1~ 1981 t o December 31 , 198~ (Section 1, Section 6, E xecutive Order No. 41~ as amend ~ d) .. An amnesty affo rds t.PJ.~t.....Q.t!:\.t.:::.QCUL PL .. fc:>1 ~ i V f?..f.!E?.. ~� ( 3 Words and Phra s es 4BO ~ c I t. i � lr:J c: ases;) ~ as he r e pn::Jm "\ sed by t h e o r� r.Je t- for ~J 1,__,_ _\:\I'J.P. i~ _t_c,:l ;i..P.!::911l~. J.._._,.. ...~~?. :t;~ �~�? . , c1 r:) I 1 0. 1~-~. ~ .....,.._ J.~ }: ~s._ -� -�-�� <:\Pd. c c P"'t.s j. r~.~!!i'!.?.... t~ xes~ "'n d .�1 1 J !;' ,;, v .~1 ,_ . :hro !, rJ."'\ 1..,. !~l:!.f!l;i..Jli.<:.?t..r.::.~. t.i.Y.@ __ l ) .:�\h i l i l, y , i h c;..t hr:,v e arisen from non�-�payrnent. n i tr:u :es in the above given period. { lJ11 d P r scor inq su ppli e d) On t t"l e othe r-� ha n d , 0'\ n a s s; essme nt i s a notice of tax due w i th a dP ma nd for payment (A lhambra C \g ~r ~ Ciga r qtte Mfg. Co. v. C ommi5sion ~ r ~ 10f5 P ~ l'll . 1 ::::::~7 unreported). An 0~ ~ Pss me n t c a n b e abated o1�� c omprom ised c,n th e adm inistrative level (Section 29~\. N at ional Internal Revenue Cod e~ n ow f )ection 204 ) 1 while an amnes ty is an act of sovereign grace which ob li. terate ~; ? n c::1ffense (Words and F'hr�a s es ~ supra) o r ~~ '=- seen h e r ~<.>~ an act which re leg ates into o blivion all unpaid inc ome, estate~ d onor's ta xes and business ta}~es J nc t tr r �e d dLtring a given period. The .imr1 1'� e~;s .i. on c r eated thus is& that co n sidering the natu~e of a ta x assessme nt~ i t s si gnificance coul d not be more than that of an amnesty properly availed of . An ,">\s sessment~ even a deficiency assessment as in the instant case~ c annot def eat the i ntended effec ts

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 4246 -- 8 - of the amnes t y br::�r: oil t.t "i ~~ p recisel y, i t i s the purpose of t i l e l ri l�. t: E' r to forgi ve thE! non-pa yment o f tllP t A:-: payer o �f his tc:n: l i a b ' l i ties. Th r r~ ~ n n n rlent who see ks to r 8c:o v e r tn: : es d � tr' r. : � 11n 1- d em i-\n d !i ometh i nq ~�Jh.i . c:h, a l t hough f" E i r tt t"; ly d u s ~ i s n ow n n n ��-f" ){i.<:; tr- n t o r h a~; h n r> n a bl :i.te i- A t e d a s a co n SF' fl ltE' n ce of s o v F"r� r in n gl"' c:\ c e. Res p o nd en t fa i led to present any c a se ot- Law w h ich pro ve s tha t a n assessment CtBn wi t h sta nd or n f:'qa t e the force and effects of R tAx ~mne s ~y. ThJ s burd e n of p r oo �f o n the p e t i t .i o n e r '<'lc?.s crea t ed b y th ~ c l ef\r rin d e xp ress t erms of the e <e c uti ve order ' s intention qual i fied a va i 1ers of t he amn esty may pay am amnesty ttii\ :�t i n 1 i e u o f said u npaid tc:~>.a~s which are f r:w gi ven (Section 2 ~ Se c t i on 5~ t )�: ecut- i "r' n r �d 9. r No. 41~ as '"' men c1e d ) � ~1 n r �P c. r n � i �fi.r: a 1 1y ~ t he p 1a i n pr tlV .is i on s in U �l:' �-: t P h� t granting ta>: a mnesty f or t tnp a i.ti 1-." .. ,.,r, f r.11�� th e peri o d ,J.:~nui" r y j ~ .1C,'t'1l l r � 1~9-r--rtnhe>r "!. 1~ 1 CfF.35 s h i f ~� ed th �" h �t t ti n' of rw nof n n r� �F?s pond e n t to sh ow t1C" f"~ .. J. h.~ .. .i. s s _t,J .::~ r1 c: 11. _9.f:.._~O ....~s ~_e_!?..�ffi.~[l t . t1 .L-:> t?..f qr .�! . . t, F,!. ... Q.r\ t �f! .. q :f... ...-t tJe.......P..r:.R1!1.!::\.l g ~j;,j._Q.IJ......_Qf. :tb.�.........~.>: ~-!= p t ..i, ~-~ . ..... o r~d e r .... _l=.QJ,.l Let_. __b_~y~;L.........e rE'as o o. a.t:l t e__ r::!?J.?,.t. i q n, vJ .i. th. ....t.IJ.~.......P..QJ.f:!\'..!;:..t..!.Y.�. r?.l:?r. .i..o g s ... .9 �f ........ t h.F.1...... .;\ m, q "" !'F .t y .J ....- ..l?..P...........e.~. __ t._g_ _m. ~.!;,{.� p l:?..t. :i,.j:.),,C).IJ ~:?.r . � .t}. .U ~n t;; ~HF? I_"' ~ 1~ l~ ...... f.9 C..........e._____t e.>.; J...J.,. �i .b.J J.J.~Y....... ~h. i. ~ .h ~ . t h t '.O t\.9 ~...�..t_IJ~.. ... . .~.tfo\.t..P. t.~. ,. / ~DCJ L.I) !;1_ . Jl~Y..e. -� beP,rt. R r '"' c:t ep .. - ~,it h ..A ..... P.CQQ~[. ~~~~j� :�e(~o;J ~~np~t~~(.~2~~ rsv~o~ ~~ 'J J,l---'fe-.. J ~ ( I c.. T. A . ~ ;tl') f ~l� e>:ce ptions A-.,. ~- 1 2o I "� a--- (~ddi tiona 11 y ~ the ) enume rated in Sec t ion 4 of Executive 1 l'f9u Order No. 41~ as amended~ do not indicate any reference to an ass essment or pending investigation aside from one ari s ing from i nformation f urnished by an informer. " Section 4 . EH cepti ons .- The follow i n g +-.a >: payen; may not avai 1 t:.h e mse 1 v e s o f t he amnesty herein g ra nt ee!: a) Tho s e fa 11 ing under the provision s of Executive Order Nos. 1~ 2 and 14; 31J

DECI SI ON CTA CASE NO. 4246 -9 - b) Thn "'W li. th inc o rn e t: .:n: cases a 1 r-E:?i=H:ly f i led i n Court as of the effec:t.i �i ty hereof; c) Tf ,D�:; E' t-Jith crim inal cases invn Jvinq vi.o l o:\tion s of th e income i-,~~: l~w .alre a d y filed in cou1~t as:: or t he ef fee t i vi ty he r�eof ~ !.1) ll �n�:; r � that h.:lve wi.l'.hholdinq '""~: l i.ii'l b .i.. l.:i t .ie<;;; urH1er" the I..J ., t i , ~ n '"' t 1 n t� ...,r�n a 1 r \eVer1 111.., (' 11'1f! (It= c'l fTlPf\C1ed ~ i .ne:-.ofat- as u,"? �: ..-dd liabilities are c:onc:errH �ri = e) Thos~ Jit h tax cases pending investiqc'\tinn hv l:he Bureau o �f lnte 1 n<M l l{r>VF.'flLIP -"\S nf the red �fP.c: t i vi t� y hen?of M~; a result 1' .in�fCltmt\ti.on furnished under Section 316 of the National Internal Revenue Code, as e:'\mende d ~ I') Thw; F' ~" l th pe ndin g r.:a e, e �::; i.n vr�.1 1 v i r �, IHIF>'tp lain ed o r unlawf' ully ; �r�r:~��i .l'r d wealth b P. �for P t ,,, c ,., � H ' ' ~~ 1 � 1h <' v ;:> n ; q) I I �i''"' f ' 1 i ,"l.b 1 e undcu� T .i \". 1 r.:� Se vP il, Chap ter Three (Fraud s , IllPg~l Exactions a nd Transactions) ,:~ net Chapte r F our ( Malvers ation nf Pub lic Funds and Property) of t he Re v i sed Penal Code~ as a mende d . ~e Thus , we deC?rn th,'i:\ t r ule in Revenue 1'1emor.Mndum Order No. 4- 87 promul ga t ing that only assessments issue d after Aug u s t 21, 1986 sha ll be a bated by the amnes t y i s beyond the contemplation of E>: ec: u t i ve Order No. 41, as amended. To paraphrase the ci ted previous d ec 1a r ation s o f t h e Supreme Court which were l i k e wise reca l led in the Tayug Rural Bank C se s upra, a d mi n i strative r ules and r egu l at ions p r omu l gated to implement 3.1?

DEC I SION CTA CASE NO. 4 246 - 10 - given leg is lation shou l d not be contradi t ory ~~~ith t.h r> st<'\ tute but co nf orm to t h e stand.-::'lrd -:; I�Jili.ch i t pr-escribes ( Di rec tor of Forest r y v . Mun o z ~ L-24796~ ,June 28, 1968~ 23 SCF:A 1 1 83) . A r u le wo ul d b e bin ding on t h e cou rts i f the sc ope is w i th in t.hP. statu t e e v en i f the c ourts are net in agree ment with the p o l icy therein or its i n n a t e wisdom ( Victorias Mill ing Co., Inc. v. Social S e curity Commissi on, L - 16704 , Ma rch 1 7 , 196 2 ~ 4 S CRA 627) . I t appP.nring t.h n.+ H ,,... r: i\se at bar is liken e d t.md er� s.i m i. l i:\ r� f,:\cts i'' l �' .l � �i 1 c t�.m-;;tances obta.ininq to t h e Cc?.SP. (')"f R.O.H. ()ut o r ,- n d qr~ t'S Philipp.inRs, Inc . , with t h e :;2\me p r inc i p " I ' 1' If"' t� ion t .o c cm tend w it h~ In rec o gnizi n g the V ""- l.i cHty of -t .I \P. t.:n: a mnes ty p r iv.i l ege app l i c8b l e tel pPt-. i t ionet-- i.n this case, t he second issu e becomes rnoot insof a r as the 1981 a n d .1 9 8 2 d e f icien cy in c ome an d sales <"\Ssessmen ts Unrl e n iably , the hcas no mor�e 1E'g to <;-I ;,, , ,r ! P ' ' ;.;, f tet- fu 11 comp 1 iance wit h t h e ccndi ti.ons set fort h i n E :�:ac: u t i ve Or der No. 4.1. The Ce r t i f ic ate of Avai l me n t d a ted Nov ember 27, 1987 ( p . 2 9, CT A rer.o t-d ) i s s ued to pet i t ioner s h o wed fu l l p ayment o �f t he .:amn e sty ta x ev i denced b y = RTR/F'O No. 9581 587 a n d CR No. 1 0 692780 d a t e d 3_1~

DECISI ON CTA CASE NO. 4246 - 11 - Dec ember 15~ 1986 . ~J i.. th 1: hiE. o n h a nd petitioner is a 1 ready re 1 iev ed f r �c�Hn r\'1Y inc ome and busin ess tax 1 iabi 1 i ty on any t.m ta:�:Pd income f rom J,r~r1u.;1r y 1 ~ 198 1 to December 31, 19 85 , including i ncrements th ereto a nd p enaltie s o n Accou nt of the non-pay me nt of the sa id t a>:. The ta >: arnnf.'!st y p.? i. d by petitioner does not however cover- .198t d eficiency e>:panded Th e e:~ p and !?d w:i t.hl�1o 1d :lnq t: i:\ '< i. :;:; one o �f t hose e}:cepted from the r 1\ .. f ' : ' 1~ of "U1r> ta>t amnes ty decr-ee p u r- su C\n t to ~:;pc:U .on 4( d ) o �f E:-ter.:utive Or der� No. 41, as a me nd ed. A 1 though pe t i t i onP.r '"' 1 1 eqed p;;>..v mr:>n t on Mar-c h 2 2 ~ .1.9 82 of i t s w.il:. lil m.lcli rog t.-a:: o n its renta l income in t h l'�e c o rd s s how proof of p ay ment. Fai.l ur e on j t � r.'�H�t tn pr-esent or attach sue h was p .':\id . I t )r.- il " li �Jit:~ r ' t upC'n pe titioner to s how pr-oof of payment . WHEREFORE, i n view of th@ foregoing, decision of respondent Commissioner o~ Internal Revenue dated February 10 , 1988 is her�by MODIFIED. Respondent is enj oined from enforcing tha coll ection of P1,663,116.98 as deficiency income 3Jd

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 4 2 46 a n d bu sin ~ ss t rn x~ q f or ~ hP y~~ r ~ L9R1 ~ nd 198 ? b y v i rtue o f pe t i t i.nP er�' r � ,..., . .., ' \ m.c-1r t r:d' 1-hF? t a }l a mnes ty un der Ex e c utive Or- d e r� No .. 4.1 , a s amen d e d . Petitioner Bay Foo d Spec i alt i es, Inc . i s o r dered to pay responden the s u m o f P2 ,817 .99 as 1981 deficiency expan ded withho ldi n g t ax, i n c lus i ve of su r char ge a n d interes t , p l u s 20% a n nual in t erest pu rsu a nt to S e cti o n 40 .-,f P r�e sidenti al Dec ree No. 1 9 94 1~ h i. c h a me nd P-d r:;r> _ t-i,on 2 8 3 ( c ) [now S e ction 2 49( c) ] of the N ,. t � r.'lni' J Co s t again s t p e>t.lU. P il ~ r . SO ORDERED . & Ch.t c>z o n Ci t v . Met 1 o l le~n i. l .a~ (~ Li g u s 7~ 1 99.1 . WE CONCUR= ~� ,, ttl ~� b�-rt / ALEX Z . REYES 1::� 1~es id.i. nq Jur.:l g e ~~Q'- ~'- ERNESTO D. ACOSTA A s sociah~ Judge 3 .1 !1

DECISION CTA CASE NO. 4246 - 13 - CE R T I F l C AT I 0 N I he r e by cer t i f y t his decision Cnurt:. o f in ~cc:ordance wi th S e c t i.cm 1. ~�; ~ 1 c {~ r t .i r> \) l ., 1 , � I ' t ,1'7' f' r1 11 ., t i t u t .i. on . F't"" e;;idin q udq<? Court. Qf fr~ : : App e.=ds 3.1R