Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersbta

10,000+ results

1.21s

  • American Package Corp. v. Commissioner

    44 B.T.A. 179 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 16, 1941

    AMERICAN PACKAGE CORPORATION, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. American Package Corp. v. Commissioner Docket No. 101266. … Noteman v. Welch (C.C.A., 1st Cir.), affirming ; .

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • W. A. Sheaffer Pen Co. v. Commissioner

    27 B.T.A. 1056 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 3, 1933

    SHEAFFER PEN COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. W. A. Sheaffer Pen Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 36604. … Lucas v. Hunt, 45 Fed.(2d) 781 ; Warner Collieries Co. v. United States, 63 Fed.(2d) 34 .

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Figueroa Street Hotel Co. v. Commissioner

    18 B.T.A. 709 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 9, 1930

    Bogle & Co. v. Commissioner, 26 Fed. (2d) 771. … The Board had before it similar questions in Planters Operating Co., 12 B. T. A. 844, and Lafayette Hotel Co., 5 B. T.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Hay Foundry & Iron Works v. Commissioner

    33 B.T.A. 144 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 30, 1935

    The Supreme Court approved that rule in Pinellas Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. Commissioner, supra. … Beviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered for the respondent.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Stokes Milling Co. v. Commissioner

    12 B.T.A. 912 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 28, 1928

    Stokes Milling Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 20298. United States Board of Tax Appeals 12 B.T.A. 912 ; 1928 BTA LEXIS 3424 ; June 28, 1928 , Promulgated *3424 1. … Paul, the petitioner filed with the Board an application for subpoena directed to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, or such *3428 person as he may designate, for his appearance before the Board at St.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Trojan Oil Co. v. Commissioner

    26 B.T.A. 659 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 19, 1932

    See Board v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 51 P. (2d) 73, 75, 76 . Compare United States v. S. S. White Dental Manufacturing Co., 274 U. S. 398, 403 . … Reviewed by the Board. Further proceedings nnay be had under Mule 6% (e).

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Todd v. Commissioner

    32 B.T.A. 1067 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 31, 1935

    In Kaplan v. Commissioner, 66 Fed. (2d) 401, the court said: * * * We see no occasion for refinement of construction against the government. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the respondent. Black and Trammell dissent.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Blackwell Oil & Gas. Co. v. Commissioner

    20 B.T.A. 661 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 4, 1930

    The decisions in Komhauser v. Dnnted States, supra, and the Superheater Co., 12 B. T. A. 6, which are relied upon by the petitioner, are not in conflict with these cases. … In the Superheater case the contemplated litigation grew out of an action of the board of directors, acting as such. The claim settled did not involve title.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Seaboard Mills, Inc. v. Commissioner

    5 B.T.A. 575 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 20, 1926

    corporation is entitled to classification as a personal service corporation its income must be ascribed primarily to the activities of the principal owners or stockholders, and as was said by the court in the case of Matteson Co. v. … In the opinion of the Board, it is immaterial whether the income derived from capital is produced by the use of that capital in the business in which the petitioner is primarily engaged.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Alexandria Paper Co. v. Commissioner

    3 B.T.A. 239 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 23, 1925

    The secretary and treasurer of the company appeared before the Board as a witness and testified that he had charge of the books of the company; that he was familiar generally with the machinery and plant assets of the company … La Belle Iron Works v. United States, 256 U. S. 377 .

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Oglesby Coal Co. v. Commissioner

    18 B.T.A. 1245 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 19, 1930

    Hord Grain Co. v. Blair, 25 Fed. (2d) 536, which affirms our decision reported in 6 B. T. A. at page 549. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the respondent.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Central Nat'l Bank v. Commissioner

    29 B.T.A. 530 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 14, 1933

    Cortland Specialty Co. v. Commissioner, 60 Fed. (2d) 937; certiorari denied, 288 U.S. 599 ; Pinellas Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. Commissioner, 287 U.S. 462 ; Prairie Oil & Gas Co. v. Motter, 1 Fed. … Botany Worsted Mills v. United States, 278 U.S. 282 . F. G. Bishoff, 6 B.T.A. 570 ; affd., 27 Fed. (2d) 91; Murphy Oil Co. v. Burnet, 55 Fed. (2d) 17; Ramsay v. United States, 55 Fed. (2d) 333; Duffin v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Staebler v. Commissioner

    17 B.T.A. 1086 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 25, 1929

    Artman v. Ferguson, 73 Mich. 146 ; 40 N. W. 907 . … In our opinion, the decision of this Board in Ormsby McKnight Mitchel, 1 B. T. A. 143, is controlling in the present instance.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • O'Shea v. Commissioner

    47 B.T.A. 646 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 8, 1942

    O'SHEA, EXECUTORS, PETITIONERS, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. O'Shea v. Commissioner Docket No. 105942. … Helvering v. LeGierse, 312 U.S. 531 . William J. O'Shea, Jr., Esq., and Edward D. Burns, Esq., for the petitioners. W. G. Ryman, Esq., for the respondent.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • S. S. Hunter, Inc. v. Commissioner

    26 B.T.A. 259 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 6, 1932

    moved to dismiss the petition filed herein for the reason that it appears that the corporate existence of the petitioner had terminated prior to the filing of the petition and hence there is no proper petition before the Board … Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat 518. And, as said in Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. Oklahoma, 273 U.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Terrace Drive Co. v. Commissioner

    5 B.T.A. 1161 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 25, 1927

    TERRACE DRIVE CO., PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Terrace Drive Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 7438. … The appeal was taken for all four years, but on the date the case was heard the taxpayer conceded that, under authority of the Board's decision in the , the Board would not have jurisdiction over the years in which overassessments

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Covington v. Commissioner

    42 B.T.A. 601 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 21, 1940

    Bibb v. Allen, 149 U. S. 481 . … In Chicago Board of Trade v. Christie Grain & Stock Co., 198 U.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Cotton States Fertilizer Co. v. Commissioner

    47 B.T.A. 748 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 23, 1942

    The salary items in question consisted of certain increases in the salaries of the president and treasurer of petitioner which were made by petitioner’s board of directors in the taxable year, “subject to the approval of … Commissioner v. Brooklyn Radio Service Corporation, 79 Fed. (2d) 833; Ames Reliable Products Co., 44 B. T. A. 176. On this issue we decide in favor of respondent. Reviewed by the Board.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Matteawan Mfg. Co. v. Commissioner

    14 B.T.A. 789 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 18, 1928

    In denying the respondent’s motion to dismiss this proceeding for lack of jurisdiction in this Board we held that the respondent’s letter *792 of August 10, 1925, is a deficiency notice within the meaning of section 279 of … United States v. Russell, 22 Fed. (2d) 249; In re McClure Co., 21 Fed. (2d) 538; United States v. Board, 14 Fed. (2d) 459; Art Metal Construction Co., 4 B. T. A. 493. Decision will be entered for the respondent.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Matteawan Manufacturing Co. v. Commissioner

    14 B.T.A. 789 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 18, 1928

    In denying the respondent’s motion to dismiss this proceeding for lack of jurisdiction in this Board we held that the respondent’s letter *792 of August 10, 1925, is a deficiency notice within the meaning of section 279 of … United States v. Russell, 22 Fed. (2d) 249; In re McClure Co., 21 Fed. (2d) 538; United States v. Board, 14 Fed. (2d) 459; Art Metal Construction Co., 4 B. T. A. 493. Decision will be entered for the respondent.

    Cited 1 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.