CTA Case No. 371 (Decision)
�� -v u - � 71 t � L � � � - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ cI � ti � 1i � i hv �y 1 �0 1 I' ; 6 2
.� �7 -- -- I I
� 71 .. - .. �� �� e �1 1 ec un �1 cc 11
- ~� ... 1 '� � �� � nt h l' . 65
� 71 -- � vn � t 1 uj e � 1 - � f c � - 1 � 0 1 ; � � � � � 1 0 � � n � -1 � � . � f 0 �� io 1 l ve c � fe f � n y I' � 6 6
.. � 71 -- t � ll � f w� - - n � �1 c �� c he 1 � f1 f -. n c - i� - � 0 1� y j fy --- -- - �� . 67 It I
.� 7 � t -7- - � v � � � � a 11 - � f .n 1 11 . 68
�7 -- i � 0� y f� �1 1 � 1 1 ny $ i e �� nf ev ! 11 - � n e 1 - �t i - � e 0- in 0f 0� 01 � - 0 of he e 1 1 �� � y, i ul
� 71 -- en f � � s � �-- � i � - t � c 1 v - � � ev I t i � - tJ � � ex � if � va 1 t yi � io f� 1 �- e � � -- i t - � 0y -� 1 et 1 �1 � !' 70
..,1" l� �� � . � I' 71
同类文件 CTA Decisions
- CTA Case No. 1267 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 1267)
- UCPB PROPERTIES, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 568)
- PROCTER & GAMBLE ASIA PTE LTD v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE(CTA Case No. EB 2301)
- PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF CAGAYAN Represented by: MS. EMILIA L. IRINGAN, Asst. Provincial Treasurer, OIC - Office of The Provincial Treasurer v. NATIONAL TRANSMISSION CORP. (TRANSCO)(CTA Case No. OC-013)
- CTA Case No. 1820 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 1820)
- CTA Case No. 2616 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 2616)
- CTA Case No. 6176 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 6176)
- CTA Case No. 4783 (Decision)(CTA Case No. 4783)
想要这份文件的分析?
让 ASG 法律 AI 为你总结、与其他判例对比,或说明它如何适用于你的情形 — 它检索的正是同一个数据库。