Thursday, February 04, 2016

Tambunting Pawnshop vs. CIR

FACTS: Petitioner claimed losses as deductions arising from the auction sales it conducted. To prove the same, petitioner submitted in evidence its “Rematado” book containing a record of items foreclosed and “Subasta” book containing a record of the auction sale of pawned items foreclosed. Petitioner likewise claimed the gain or loss on auction sale represents the difference between the capital (amount loaned to the pawnee, unpaid interest, and other expenses) and the price for which the pawned articles were sold.

ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioner is entitled to the losses as deductions

RULING: No. Petitioner did not properly prove its losses since the Subasta books did not reflect the true amounts of the proceeds and the Rematado books did not reflect the capital since the only amounts therein were those given to the pawnees.

The losses claimed from fire and theft were also disallowed since while certifications from the police and fire departments and a list of the properties lost were submitted, the petitioner did not submit sworn declarations describing the loss.

Digg Google Bookmarks reddit Mixx StumbleUpon Technorati Yahoo! Buzz DesignFloat Delicious BlinkList Furl

0 comments: on "Tambunting Pawnshop vs. CIR"

Post a Comment