CTA Case No. 613 (Decision)
~� -. ? U L (.; TH P! .lLIPPlN � COURT OF TAX APPEA.I...S c N.A.NIU X� � � � . e�r�, � vr u � � � � 61 � ~ ~N~ VE j -2.- nt. -- . . � .. ... -... .. � X � lt � c 1 ct c a� t 1one c., tn e po d II' al yin� ec pl I $ ._ n t 0 0 ... � f � ) t tax n r!o i:r 7t 1� � r f .r hw � t l t � e 1 1;)1 t 1 r ( l; epu 1125 l l f � t u y In r � ue 1 1� y� l 1 e ( 11 ct nt � n �.. J . � ey. 1� � � � . c. �121 t wi 350
r ''! . � f� �� i t l.e f � .X' ~ c t� I t 0 � r c ft f r � f t l f " or c 1 r c t l',, c r tl c c t t el .I..I. � � r �0 �l I c ... .1 yJ s t � vf .., f 1 ., 352
l 't 13 � .. t t '' t ! I t ully, rt F ty n If � (p � l � . u 95 � 1 ~ '(. t n � c ll � .. th - fun o ... 1 y � u 0 ~� 'f.;u �J XC ss u 1.., 7 "�~� c1 0 'X n s x. c. .ra l p. 4 ... , 0 � 6C , 6t t the tr P a ly� s r ct y 0 �h t v�ru~a 0 � ct �~~ �-P' b t c c c. l) 353
OE~*., :r(A~ :e. f � . ,. (. �~ t.. >,j(.". 61~ Cl. l Ct lt.r . r on 0 niy, � tt at .ts t 1 a .. ot.�.~. 1 n � r: { ~ d .v' -o it. 'I> ~ e .~tit101 ... h~r~in 1 a. c. ! t i to t;n.e a~p. cv .1 f ~1ep lie ~~ t ax f r nd . X' x !:ant dten ' o~f! . ~-><!'U. rt c:ons:t�..:. r c Clil � 1 pri �iltl;:tc "'oncedido por 1 ;.;r ~�~ nte 1 eon� ee~ion.. ;;.to1 SU$ $UC' so os o c ionar:tcs ab n~ ~.sF. t.r �t.:rxcstraL:tttnte a la t.~sc:rer. ...� d '.loay o en �' ' (lr.�<-;e y i.Q~ p l!,'fl ~l� c;~s(,l de q e e t s ' -c �ltin:cs iu (il s.en ~ ut i: -d com� .1 n -unr.etptos 0 .d �
1 � 355
c 1 .... t �!" o.r c l� � sc t� y ly .r oy l .f.� ... t t 356
� c. l . ;!) . � t fX 0 fr nc hould $ t on~td . ng t.h t tl h ti { 0 y .l'.i . -r.:i �� t t~� ~io. 7 . n 1 ... ... 1 ( . Vol 'o. �9 , . � l61 0J l6l<') an n ..:.e t.io 2'69 of t. T ., ct. :ton .... of '' ;Ct a'liG\ .,. ~15 {2"'} � the ~� () IJ(,xt..f .f; d tu la .. r . Jl n �� I c.. vs 1 "..".,' ll ctor of In .. \.even to pay �the } -h for"" � h taxp y r retn 1 � , ... rr�� nc hiiil � t-" a p.rasc.ri}!) i n ~ ;t on I � no c oll c ...d i~ 1: and .hat in~ludeji r. t n} _pQn t1G �roSe- rnc11~ tn 357
. � � n - � r<(' � � t on n f ny � f ty, l. ' � � l � � l ' 358 . \:.�\' **""' $ ffl'#" t 1 *b':.Jio
/ � - () ' t � ... � 359
� - 11 - � X a c f h rx f� tl hi y v !n 1 n �a1 t y y r an la � 1 t1 .... 1 � J c 11 .- y 2.} � t X. t t ll a !i''9 of t t e~ t c� � n ' � fr ax. � h c; on y .�.. 0 f t et � � ' 0 lly � rty1 �� li t� �� � l - �"� � o. � 1 � t h t 6 fl:' .: $ J fr c 1e � 1 t;r � . A�� t- 360
-- d b �ny � b.ortt, h. t$u v ' tl x fr t 1"Hl� g) a nu nt , ) X un ctp l .c X ,~--~~ ( 1. ' x) X X X .1 c � ~t i o� t tiC r fr m t � i1ymtmt of " �l l r 1 ~ t� (;Q l 1. com ~e ,ri o "" ~1 c I!J; Ulfl:QE=Q t hJ p i � noth� g � 361
,- � -- l �1 I t 1 ~ nt l ~) , 1 p � tal p nounf'">�'Zl'!')ft lc an la, ' 362
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.