# Louis Werner Saw Mill Co. v. Helvering

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · March 7, 1938 · 96 F.2d 539

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6873777

## Case

- **Full name:** LOUIS WERNER SAW MILL CO. v. HELVERING, Com'r of Internal Revenue
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** March 7, 1938
- **Citations:** 96 F.2d 539; 68 App. D.C. 267; 21 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 135; 1938 U.S. App. LEXIS 4716
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing by Groner
- **Judges:** Groner, Miller, Stephens
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6873777

## Opinion text

On Rehearing.
GRONER, C. J.
Petitioner asks for a rehearing on the ground that when the assessment for 1918 was first made the statute of limitations had run. We think this contention, if true, would not affect the question whether return on the installment basis could have been voluntarily adopted at'that time for years not barred. Rehearing is accordingly denied. In the alternative, petitioner asks that our opinion be modified so as to direct the Board of Tax Appeals to allow due credits to petitioner on account of overpayments for the years 1918 through 1921, on the ground that as to those years the statute had run even for a return on the installment basis. This phase of the case was not overlooked in preparing the original opinion, but our conclusion was that the record did not sufficiently show whether in fact the statute of limitations had run for the years in question. No opinion on the point was expressed, therefore, and our decision should be considered as being without prejudice to the full development of this point before the Board if the Board will entertain a motion to that end.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6873777. Public record. Not legal advice.