Case law

Seder v. Commissioner

38 B.T.A. 874 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 13, 1938

The decision of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Anderson v. … In Cole v. Commissioner, 81 Fed. (2d) 485, reversing 29 B. T.

Rauh v. Commissioner

19 B.T.A. 993 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 19, 1930

He cites Lewellyn v. Frick, 268 U. S. 238 ; Charles L. Harris, Administrator, 5 B. T. A. 41; Mercantile Trust Co., Execu tor, 13 B. T. A. 85; Gould v. Gould, 245 U. S. 151 ; Shwab v. Doyle, 258 U. … See also Reinecke v. Northern Trust Co., 278 U. S. 339 ; Louis M. Weiller et al., 18 B. T. A. 1121; Gaither v. Miles, 268 Fed. 692 ; John L. Mimnaugh, Jr., Executor, 66 Ct. Cls. 441; Means v.

Appeal of Secor Hotel Co.

7 B.T.A. 158 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 28, 1927

subject of a claim for loss on account of the obsolescence or destruction of the good will of a business which has been compulsorily terminated by reason of prohibition legislation was the subject of consideration of the Board … A. 952, and by the United States Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Red Wing Malting Co. v.

Automatic Sprinkler Co. v. Commissioner

7 B.T.A. 674 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 18, 1927

AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY OF AMERICA, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Automatic Sprinkler Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 4987. … The Board in its decision promulgated November 12, 1926, decided the issues raised by the pleadings, and the matter of settlement of the amount of *3129 deficiencies in accordance with the Board's decision under Rule 50 is

De Sabichi v. Commissioner

4 B.T.A. 445 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 28, 1926

DE SABICHI, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. De Sabichi v. Commissioner Docket No. 10802. … decision of the Board which has become final.

S. & G. Hotel Supply Co. v. Commissioner

1 B.T.A. 201 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 18, 1924

Hotel Supply Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 175. … United States Board of Tax Appeals 1 B.T.A. 201 ; 1924 BTA LEXIS 214 ; December 18, 1924 , decided Submitted November 10, 1924 . *214 Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution under the provisions of rule 18. M. S.

Fincher Motors, Inc. v. Commissioner

43 B.T.A. 673 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 19, 1941

Sanford Corporation v. Commissioner, 106 Fed. (2d) 882; certiorari denied, 309 U. S. 657 , affirming 38 B. T. A. 139; Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. United States, 288 U. S. 269 ; Cox Motor Sales Co., 42 B. … The Board can not assume values or speculate with respect thereto.

Caldwell Oil Corp. v. Commissioner

47 B.T.A. 707 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 22, 1942

The facts here do not bring this case within the rule of Helvering v. O'Donnell, 303 U. S. 370 ; Helvering v. Elbe Oil Land Development Co., 303 U. S. 372 ; and Anderson v. Helvering, 310 U. S. 404 . … The Board recognized that their portions of the oil runs was “net” to them, Ortiz paying all expenses.

S. N. & C. Russell Manufacturing Co. v. Commissioner

16 B.T.A. 501 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 13, 1929

See Ice Service Co. v. Commissioner (C. C. A.), 30 Fed. (2d) 230, in which the court affirmed the decision of the Board in 9 B. T. A. 386. … See News Publishing Co. v.

Jackson-Wermich Trust v. Commissioner

24 B.T.A. 150 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 24, 1931

In Heeht v. … Hecht v. Malley, supra; White v. Hornblower, 27 Fed. (2d) 777; E. A. Landreth Co. et al., 11 B. T. A. 1; Dauphin Deposit Trust Co., Trustee, supra; and Lloyd M. Willis et al., 22 B. T. A. 564.

Ohio Clover Leaf Dairy Co. v. Commissioner

9 B.T.A. 433 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 30, 1927

THE OHIO CLOVER LEAF DAIRY COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Ohio Clover Leaf Dairy Co. v. Commissioner Docket Nos. 6778, 13029. … This goes beyond the function of the Board.

Stein v. Commissioner

46 B.T.A. 135 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 21, 1942

Helvering v. Canfield, 291 U. S. 163 . In H. Y. McCord, 31 B. T. … In Smith v.

Ohio Steak & Barbecue Co. v. Bowers

77 Ohio Law. Abs. 65 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 21, 1957

The law of the present case is well established by Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Evatt, 143 Oh St 71, 28 O. O. 21, and Harper Co. v. Peck, 161 Oh St, 300, 53 O. O. 178. … It only remains for this Board to apply that law to the facts as herein found.

Simms Petroleum Co. v. Commissioner

28 B.T.A. 1107 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 15, 1933

Woolford Realty Co. v. Rose, 286 U.S. 319 ; Swift & Co. v. … Woolford Realty Co. v. Rose, supra, and Swift & Co. v. United States, supra.

Payne v. Commissioner

19 B.T.A. 1305 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 29, 1930

Such was not the situation in the case of Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U. S. 186 . In that case the board of directors, by resolution, authorized a stock dividend. … The case of Eisner v. Macomber was decided by the Supreme Court on March 8, 1920, prior to the issuance of the stock in question, and a year prior to the making of the return for 1920.

Cunningham Sheep & Land Co. v. Commissioner

7 B.T.A. 652 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 13, 1927

The Board has no jurisdiction of determinations of deficiencies in tax arising under acts prior to the Revenue Act of 1916. Section 283, Revenue Act of 1926. … See Wirt Franklin v. Commissioner, 7 B. T. A. 636. The consent between the parties was dated September 1, 1923.

Howe v. Commissioner

19 B.T.A. 849 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 2, 1930

Brown, Esq., for the petitioners. O. J. Tall, Esq., for the respondent. … Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell, supra ; Lucas v. Howard, 10 B.T.A. 62 , 280 U.S. 14 A ; Blair v. Byers, 35 Fed.(2d) 326 ; Kreipke v. Commissioner, 32 Fed.(2d) 594 .

Pennsylvania Cent. Brewing Co. v. Commissioner

9 B.T.A. 264 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 23, 1927

See also Red Wing Malting Co. v. Willcuts, 15 Fed. (2d) 626. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will he entered on 15 days' notice, under Rule 50. SteRNi-iagen and Murdock dissent.

Richardson v. Commissioner

42 B.T.A. 830 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 27, 1940

I think he made his reports correctly, the Commissioner erred, and the Board has made an unwise decision by attaching undue importance to the return of the shares. … The rule here adopted by the Board will permit short sellers to choose their own tax year after their gain or loss has become fixed. Cf. Ruml v. Commissioner, 83 Fed. (2d) 257; Commissioner v.

Peck v. Commissioner

34 B.T.A. 402 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 22, 1936

Morgan v. Commissioner, 76 Fed. (2d) 391; Rumsey v. Commissioner, 82 Fed. (2d) 158. Cf. DeFord v. Commissioner, 29 Fed. (2d) 532; William H. Upmeyer, 22 B. T. A. 971; Frances G. Smith, 23 B. T. A. 1134; D. A. … Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered under Rule 50. Leech concurs in the result. Smith dissents.