Case law

Kuhn v. Commissioner

24 B.T.A. 216 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 29, 1931

A. 1101, where we held, following the decision of the court in Merle-Smith v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, supra, that the beneficiaries were entitled to depletion deductions. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgments will l>e entered under Rule 50.

Kings County Development Co. v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 1291 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 26, 1933

In Metcalfe v. Merritt, 14 Cal. … We are of the opinion that the petitioner is liable to income tax upon the profit made by it, under Burnet v. Commonwealth Improvement Co., supra. Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the respondent.

Adams v. Commissioner

16 B.T.A. 497 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 13, 1929

This Board approved that determination and the Board’s decision was affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals. The facts of this proceeding are that William P. … Judgment will be entered v/nder Rule 50.

Horn v. Commissioner

23 B.T.A. 1131 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 14, 1931

A. 235; affd., Inland Products Co. v. Blair, 31 Fed. (2d) 867; and Philip C. Brown et al., 10 B. T. A. 1122. See also Mary W. Leach, 16 B. T. A. 781; affd., Leach v. Commissioner, 50 Fed. (2d) 371.

Brooklyn City R.R. v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 77 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 16, 1932

In support of his estoppel argument, the Commissioner relies upon the principle of estoppel and cites the case of Greylock Mills v. Blair, 298 Fed. 846 . We do not think that this case is an authority for his position. … American Hide & Leather Co. v. United States, 284 U. S. 598 . Judgment of no deficiency for the calendar year 1921 will he entered.

Appeals of Saul

4 B.T.A. 639 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 31, 1926

A., 127, the Board said: It seems to us to be fundamentally unsound to determine income tax liability by wliat might have taken place rather than by what actually occurred. … In this respect this appeal is essentially different from the case of United States v. Mellon, 281 Fed. 645 , in which the corporation did not intend to pay the cash dividend and was without funds with which to do so.

Loeser v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 601 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 31, 1933

The decision on this point would be the same were we to apply the rule laid down by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Greylock Mills v. … See Austin Co. v. Commissioner, 35 Fed. (2d) 910. In A. L. Wilson Co., 24 B. T. A. 1056, we had before us a somewhat similar situation.

General Indus. Corp. v. Commissioner

35 B.T.A. 615 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 10, 1937

A. 249, citing Commissioner v. Van Vorst, 59 Fed. (2d) 677; Jones v. Helvering, 71 Fed. (2d) 214; certiorari denied, 293 U. S. 583 , and other cases; also A. S. Eldridge, 30 B. T. … A. 1322; affd., 79 Fed. (2d) 629; and Commissioner v. McCreery, 83 Fed. (2d) 817.

Holmby Corp. v. Commissioner

28 B.T.A. 1092 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 15, 1933

Langstaff v. Lucas, 9 Fed. (2d) 691; affd., 13 Fed. (2d) 1022; Hellmich v. … Eeviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered under Bule 50. Sec. 201.

Del Mar Addition v. Commissioner

40 B.T.A. 833 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 31, 1939

The Board’s recent decision in Flomot Gin Co., 40 B. T. A. 689, is distinguishable. … Beviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered for the respondent.

Farmers Union Co-op Oil Co. v. Commissioner

38 B.T.A. 64 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 13, 1938

A. 359; Farmers Co-Operative Co. of Wohoo, Neb. v. United States, (Ct. Cls.), 23 Fed. Supp. 123. … Reviewed by the Board. Decision will he entered for the respondent.

Preston v. Commissioner

9 B.T.A. 645 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 19, 1927

The facts in the instant case bring it squarely within the decision of this Board in Wirt Franklin v. Commissioner, 7 B. T. … Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered for the petitioner.

Daniel Bros. Co. v. Commissioner

7 B.T.A. 1086 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 20, 1927

Goodrich v. Edwards, 255 U. S. 527 ; United States v. Flannery, 268 U. S. 98 ; McCaughn v. Ludington, 268 U. S. 106 ; Appeal of River and Rail Storage Co., 1 B. T. A. 1098. … The same question here presented was considered by this Board in Appeal of Marsh & Marsh, Inc., 5 B. T. A. 902, and Appeal of Anderson & Co., 6 B. T.

Rothschild v. Commissioner

26 B.T.A. 345 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 9, 1932

Packard Motor Co. v. United States, 39 Fed. (2d) 991. This identical question has been before this Board and the courts in many instances and decisions have been consistently adverse to the contentions here. … If there is any infirmity in the law which taxes the income here involved a second time, it can be cured only by legislation, which is not the province of this Board. The determinations of the respondent are approved.

Cunningham v. Commissioner

20 B.T.A. 428 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 31, 1930

A. 1147, in which we held that where the adjudication occurs after the filing of a petition with the Board, the jurisdiction of the courts and the Board is concurrent. … A. 11; McLain Rogers v. United States, 41 Fed. (2d) 865. While those cases deal with losses on corporate stock, the same rules are applicable to the present case.

Southwestern Inv. Co. v. Commissioner

19 B.T.A. 30 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 26, 1930

In the case of Law v. Rich, 47 W. Va. 634 ; 35 S. … Scott v. W. G. Eads Brokerage Co., 117 Fed. 21 , certiorari denied; 187 U. S. 647 .] In Brant v. Virginia Coal & Iron Co., 93 U.

Binger v. Commissioner

22 B.T.A. 111 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 6, 1931

He attended the final meeting of the board of directors of the Merchants & Shippers Insurance Company, at which the sum of $5,000 was voted to be paid to the petitioner, and this amount was so paid by the old company. … See also Jones v. Commissioner, 31 Fed. (2d) 755; Blair v. Rosseter, 33 Fed. (2d) 286, affirming the decision of the Board reported at 12 B. T. A. 254.

Dauchy v. Commissioner

23 B.T.A. 528 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 2, 1931

This case, upon its facts, is clearly controlled by the several decisions of this Board and of the courts bearing upon the issue here raised. . See Edward 8. Jones, 6 B. T. A. 1048; Workman v. … A. 196; Edwards v. Keith, 231 Fed. 110 ; certiorari denied, 243 U. S. 638 ; Woods v. Lewellyn, 252 Fed. 106 ; Jackson v. Smietanka, 272 Fed. 970 . Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered for the respondent.

Headley v. Commissioner

37 B.T.A. 738 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 20, 1938

Similar questions have been considered by the Board and the courts in numerous cases. In Welch v. Helvering, 290 U. … Any other course upon the part of its board of directors would have been unusual and would, no doubt, have subjected them to well founded criticism by its stockholders. See also National Outdoor Advertising Bureau v.

General Utils. & Operating Co. v. Commissioner

29 B.T.A. 934 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 30, 1934

In State v. B. & O. … In either case, it is to be taken as it emanates from the board. A part of it cannot■ be taken and the rest discarded.