Case law

Caughey-Jossman Co. v. Commissioner

8 B.T.A. 201 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 22, 1927

Ashton, 8 Peters 148 ; Marshall v. B. & O. R. R. Co., 16 How. 314, 342 . … Reviewed by the Board. Order of dismissal will he entered. Midliken and Smith dissent.

Colorado & S. Ry. v. Commissioner

36 B.T.A. 1248 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 31, 1937

Co. v. Helvering (App. D. … The Board holds, in accordance with the opinion of the court in Southern Railway Co. v.

Makransky v. Commissioner

35 B.T.A. 395 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 5, 1937

In United States v. … In Jackson v.

Leighton Bros. Printing Co. v. Commissioner

8 B.T.A. 1006 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 25, 1927

LEIGHTON BROTHERS PRINTING CO., PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Leighton Bros. Printing Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 10329. … At a formal meeting of the board of directors held on January 11, 1921, a resolution was formally adopted that the president's salary for 1920 should be the amount of $14,400.

Wegeforth v. Commissioner

42 B.T.A. 633 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 28, 1940

The Board decided that such activity did not constitute a trade or business and the Board’s decision was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit. See also City Bank Farmers Trust Co., Trustee, supra. … Decision will be entered v/nder Rule 50.

J. F. Anderson Lumber Co. v. Commissioner

15 B.T.A. 475 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 19, 1929

To the same effect was- the decision of the Board in Edwin J. Schoettle Co., 13 B. T. A. 950. *479 In the proceeding at bar the functions of the treasurer were being exercised by the persons who signed the return. … Russell v. United States, 279 U. S. 836 . Reviewed by the Board. . Judgment of no deficiency will be entered for the petitioner.

Central Loan & Inv. Co. v. Commissioner

39 B.T.A. 981 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 24, 1939

The leading case is Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co., 282 U. S. 359 ; but many others are set out in the recent Board case of Estate of William H. Block, 39 B. T. A. 338. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the petitioner.

Appeal of Portland Railway, Light & Power Co.

1 B.T.A. 1150 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 20, 1925

The Board decided, however, in the Appeal of Winthrop Ames, 1 B. T. … S. 98 , and McCaughn v. Luding ton, 268 U. S. 106 .

Ayer v. Commissioner

26 B.T.A. 9 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 6, 1932

Kornhauser v. United States, 276 U. S. 145 . … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered m>4er Rule 50.

Whorton v. Commissioner

7 B.T.A. 771 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 29, 1927

The Board has found the value of the land to be $7.50. … The Board at this time will not attempt to pass on the situation as to the rights of the widow in the State of Nebraska.

HEYMAN v. COMMISSIONER

44 B.T.A. 1009 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 17, 1941

The Board held that it was. … Chandler v. Commissioner, supra; Helvering v. Clif ford, supra. Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered under Rule SO.

Gordon v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 377 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 20, 1932

See Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & Iron Co., 150 U. S. 371 ; McDonald v. Williams, 177 U. S. 397 ; and Lawrence v. Greenup (C. C. A.), 97 Fed. 906 . … Decision will be entered, v/nder Rule 50.

C. P. Ford & Co. v. Commissioner

28 B.T.A. 156 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 23, 1933

Blair v. Oesterlein Machine Co., 275 U.S. 220 ), is not to be lightly set aside. … Reserves of any sort are not ordinarily deductible, Spring Canyon Coal Co. v.

Saunders v. Commissioner

11 B.T.A. 201 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 26, 1928

Marsh v. Nichols, 128 U. S. 605, 612 ; Brown, v. Duchesne, 19 How. 183 . … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will te entered for the respondent.

Schweitzer & Conrad, Inc. v. Commissioner

41 B.T.A. 533 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 5, 1940

In Bickford's Inc. v. … The courts and this Board have frequently held that, where the language of a statute is plain and susceptible of but one meaning there is no justification for resort to judicial construction. Caminetti v.

E. M. Pringle Naval Stores Co. v. Commissioner

23 B.T.A. 1328 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 27, 1931

In Liberty Baking Co. v. … The waivers are as valid as though executed by the board of directors.

Cappon v. Commissioner

28 B.T.A. 357 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 13, 1933

In Burnet v. Clark, 287 U.S. 410 , the United States Supreme Court stated as follows: The respondent was employed as an officer of the corporation; the business which he conducted for it was not his own. … Again, in the case of Dalton v. Bowers, 287 U.S. 404 , the United States Supreme Court stated: * * * Dalton was not regularly engaged in the business of buying and selling corporate stocks.

Sharp v. Commissioner

38 B.T.A. 166 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 26, 1938

A. 112; Slayton v. Commissioner, 76 Fed. (2d) 497; John E. Zimmermann, 36 B. T. A. 279. … See Whitcher v. Welch, 22 Fed. Supp. 763, and authorities cited. On the second issue, respondent’s action is reversed. Judgments will be entered under Bule 50.

Appeal of Mills

1 B.T.A. 659 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 28, 1925

The Board finds that it is entitled to depreciation at the rate of 4 per cent per annum for one-half year upon such additions. … The Board concludes that these items will be adjusted accordingly. (3) The taxpayer paid no New York State franchise tax until 1920.

Ginn-Coleman Co. v. Commissioner

12 B.T.A. 550 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 13, 1928

A. 342, asks the Board to set aside respondent’s determination, on the ground that the revenue agent’s report shows error on its face. … See Updike v. United States, 8 *556 Fed. (2d) 913.