Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 22 views

    53 56 Tax

    Uploaded by

    Lee

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    53 56 Tax

    Uploaded by

    Lee
    22 views2 pages

    Original Title

    53-56-tax

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    22 views2 pages

    53 56 Tax

    Uploaded by

    Lee

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    #53

    An equity investment is a capital, not ordinary, asset of the investor the


    sale or exchange of which results in either a capital gain or a capital loss.
    The gain or the loss is ordinary when the property sold or exchanged
    is not a capital asset.

    In the hands, however, of another who holds the shares of stock by way of
    an investment, the shares to him would be capital assets. When
    the shares held by such investor become worthless, the loss is
    deemed to be a loss from the sale or exchange of capital assets.

    When securities become worthless, there is strictly no sale or exchange


    but the law deems the loss anyway to be "a loss from the sale or exchange
    of capital assets."

    Capital losses are allowed to be deducted only to the extent of capital


    gains, i.e., gains derived from the sale or exchange of capital assets,
    and not from any other income of the taxpayer.

    #54

    for tax purposes, the co-ownership of inherited properties is automatically


    converted into an unregistered partnership the moment the said common
    properties and/or the incomes derived therefrom are used as a common
    fund with intent to produce profits for the heirs in proportion to their
    respective shares in the inheritance as determined in a project partition
    either duly executed in an extrajudicial settlement or approved by the court
    in the corresponding testate or intestate proceeding. The reason for this is
    simple. From the moment of such partition, the heirs are entitled already to
    their respective definite shares of the estate and the incomes thereof, for
    each of them to manage and dispose of as exclusively his own without the
    intervention of the other heirs, and, accordingly he becomes liable
    individually for all taxes in connection therewith. If after such partition, he
    allows his share to be held in common with his co-heirs under a single
    management to be used with the intent of making profit thereby in
    proportion to his share, there can be no doubt that, even if no document or
    instrument were executed for the purpose, for tax purposes, at least, an
    unregistered partnership is formed.

    #55

    The sharing of returns does not in itself establish a partnership whether or


    not the persons sharing therein have a joint or common right or interest in
    the property. There must be a clear intent to form a partnership, the
    existence of a juridical personality different from the individual partners,
    and the freedom of each party to transfer or assign the whole property.

    #56
    To regard the petitioners as having formed a taxable unregistered
    partnership would result in oppressive taxation and confirm the dictum that
    the power to tax involves the power to destroy. That eventuality should be
    obviated.

    As testified by Jose Obillos, Jr., they had no such intention. They were co-
    owners pure and simple. To consider them as partners would obliterate the
    distinction between a co-ownership and a partnership. The petitioners
    were not engaged in any joint venture by reason of that isolated
    transaction.

    Their original purpose was to divide the lots for residential purposes. If
    later on they found it not feasible to build their residences on the lots
    because of the high cost of construction, then they had no choice but to
    resell the same to dissolve the co-ownership. The division of the profit was
    merely incidental to the dissolution of the co-ownership which was in the
    nature of things a temporary state. 

    You might also like