Case law

Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 277 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 9, 1932

We believe such to be the clear import declared by the court in the case of Harris & Co. v. Lucas, 48 Fed. (2d) 187. … Practically to the same purport is the case of American Rolling Mills v. Commissioner, 41 Fed. (2d) 314. Also Corning Glass *280 Works v. Lucas, 37 Fed. (2d) 798; Rodeo-Vallejo Ferry Co., 24 B. T.

Everett Knitting Works v. Commissioner

1 B.T.A. 5 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 9, 1924

Everett Knitting Works v. Commissioner Docket No. 2. … The only determination which the Board is called upon to make is with reference to the amount which the taxpayer had paid before the passage of the statute by which the Board was created.

Weisbecker v. Commissioner

18 B.T.A. 766 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 13, 1930

CHARLES WEISBECKER (A CORPORATION), PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Weisbecker v. Commissioner Docket Nos. 30787, 41278. … Upon disallowance of the deductions claimed the petitioner appealed to this Board and the Board sustained the Commissioner's disallowance in .

Stacy v. Commissioner

43 B.T.A. 91 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 13, 1940

The petitioner’s dual position as an individual and as a guardian must be kept clear, Van Wart v. Commissioner, 295 U. S. 112 . … It is still true, as the Board said in the earlier proceeding covering; 1931 and 1932, that the Commissioner’s concept of the petitioner’s-relation to the income and expenses of her wards is incorrect.

Noaker Ice Cream Co. v. Commissioner

9 B.T.A. 1100 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 7, 1928

The petitioner concedes in its brief that the holding of this Board in Appeal of Even Realty Co., 1 B. T. A. 355, is opposed to its view, but invites our attention to case of Ludey v. United States, 61 Ct. … The case of United States v.

Cuyahoga County Bd. of Revision v. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland

20 Ohio Misc. 194 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 5, 1968

Keith Columbus Co. v. Board of Revision of Franklin County, 148 Ohio St. 253 ; American Steel and Wire Co. v. Board of Revision of Cuyahoga County, 139 Ohio St. 388 . … Higbee Co. v. Evatt, Tax Commr., 140 Ohio St. 325 .” In other words, as this Board said in the case of Leone Majoewsky v.

Peytona Lumber Co. v. Commissioner

21 B.T.A. 354 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 18, 1930

The courts and the Board have frequently held that management or control of the business is not the control required by statute. In Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. … See also Ice Service Co. v. Commissioner, 30 Fed. (2d) 230; Island Petroleum Co., supra; Watsontown Brick Co., 3 B. T. A. 85; Tunnel Railroad of St. Louis et al., 4 B. T. A. 596; St. Louis Bridge Co. et al., 17 B. T.

Neal v. Commissioner

40 B.T.A. 1033 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 7, 1939

Langford Investment Co. v. Commissioner, 77 Fed. (2d) 468; McGinley v. Commissioner, 80 Fed. (2d) 692; State Savings Loan & Trust Co. v. Commissioner, 63 Fed. (2d) 482; Huntington National Bank v. … In McGinley v.

Neiman-Marcus Co. v. Commissioner

11 B.T.A. 1036 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 4, 1928

NEIMAN-MARCUS CO., PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Neiman-Marcus Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 11273. … the date of final decision by said Board.

Appeal of Faulkner

4 B.T.A. 804 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 15, 1926

Littleton : The decision of the question involved in this proceeding is governed by the opinion of the court in United States v. Robbins, 269 U. S. 315 , and the decision of the Board in the Appeal of D. Cerruti, 4 B.

Appeal of Samuels

4 B.T.A. 826 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 15, 1926

Marquette : The decision of the question involved in this proceeding is governed by the opinion of the court in United States v. Robbins, 269 U. S. 315 , and the decision of the Board in the Appeal of D. Cerruti, 4 B.

Appeal of Minderman

4 B.T.A. 818 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 15, 1926

Littleton : The decision of the question involved in this proceeding is governed by the opinion of the court in United States v. Robbins, 269 U. S. 315 , and the decision of the Board in the Appeal of D. Cerruti, 4 B.

Williams v. Commissioner

21 B.T.A. 109 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 28, 1930

A. 481, the Board of Tax Appeals held that a legal expenditure made in defending a suit for an accounting and damages resulting from an alleged patent infringement was deductible as a business expense. … As pointed out by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Commissioner v.

Effler v. Commissioner

29 B.T.A. 784 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 17, 1934

In Burnet v. … See also Board v. Commissioner, 51 Fed. (2d) 73, and Ford v. Commissioner, 51 Fed. (2d) 206.

Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Commissioner

22 B.T.A. 1407 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 30, 1931

Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 13 B. T. … Commissioner v. Old Colony R. R. Co., 26 Fed. (2d) 408.

Whitaker v. Commissioner

33 B.T.A. 865 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 31, 1935

S. 340 ; Wetmore v. Markoe, 196 U. S. 68 ; In re Hubbard, 98 Fed. 710 ; Turner v. Turner, 108 Fed. 785 . In Dunbar v. … This is equally true of the Board’s more recent opinions in James H. Hyde, 31 B. T. A. 256; 82 Fed. (2d) 174; and Carl B. Tuttle, 31 B. T. A. 782 (now on review, C. C. A., 6th Cir.). Reviewed by the Board.

Cleveland Trust Co. v. Commissioner

39 B.T.A. 429 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 14, 1939

Regulations have been promulgated by the respondent, and much has been said by the courts and the Board about the pertinent meaning and application of the term. … See also Helvering v. Coleman-Gilbert Associates, 296 U. S. 369 ; Helvering v. Combs, 296 U. S. 365 ; and Swanson v. Commissioner, 296 U. S. 362 .

Mossman, Yarnelle & Co. v. Commissioner

9 B.T.A. 45 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 11, 1927

Ludington v. McCaughn, 268 U. S. 106 ; 5 Am. Fed. Tax Rep. 5376; United States v. Flannery, 268 U. S. 98 ; 5 Am. Fed. Tax Rep. 5373. … Keviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered on 15 days’ notice, under Rule 50.

Appeal of Graves

4 B.T.A. 804 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 15, 1926

Littleton : The decision of the question involved in this proceeding is governed by the opinion of the court in United States v. Robbins, 269 U. S. 315 , and the decision of the Board in the Appeal of D. Cerruti, 4 B.

Appeal of Thatcher

4 B.T.A. 812 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 15, 1926

Littleton: The decision of the question involved in this proceeding is governed by the opinion of the court in United States v. Robbins, 269 U. S. 315 , and the decision of the Board in the Appeal of D. Cerruti, 4 B. T.