Case law

Dilks v. Commissioner

19 B.T.A. 646 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 22, 1930

DILKS, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Dilks v. Commissioner Docket No. 27997. … The boats were delivered to the Shipping Board in 1920.

Coen v. Commissioner

18 B.T.A. 1274 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 20, 1930

Decisions of the courts and of the Board in which it was merely held that the individual taxpayer was engaged in business or was in fact, in his own behalf, and not merely by reason of his investment in a corporation or association … Such are Bryce v. Keith, 257 Fed. 133 ; Mente v. Eisner, 266 Fed. 161 ; Oscar K. Eysen bach, 10 B. T. A. 716; cited by petitioner.

Downing v. Commissioner

43 B.T.A. 1147 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 26, 1941

See also Board v. Commissioner, 51 Fed. (2d) 73; certiorari denied, 284 U. S. 658 ; Commissioner v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 62 Fed. (2d) 505; Blum v. Helvering, 74 Fed. (2d) 482; certiorari denied, 295 U. … See North American Oil Consolidated v. Burnet, supra; Board v. Commissioner, supra; Commissioner v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., supra; Blum v. Helvering, supra; Champlin v. Commissioner, supra; National City Bank v.

Liquid Carbonic Corp. v. Commissioner

34 B.T.A. 1191 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 22, 1936

A. 869, 875, and cases there cited; footnote 3 in Helvering v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 293 U. S. 282 ; Surety Finance Co. v. Commissioner, 77 Fed. (2d) 221; and Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. … Reviewed by the Board. Decisions will be entered under Bule 50.

Adams v. Commissioner

39 B.T.A. 387 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 9, 1939

ADAMS, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Adams v. Commissioner Docket No. 88274. … Evans, and Rossheim v. Commissioner, all cited above, been fully, and we think soundly, set forth, so that further extended discussion is not here necessary.

Fidelity Ins. Agency v. Commissioner

1 B.T.A. 86 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 21, 1924

Agency v. Commissioner Docket No. 254. United States Board of Tax Appeals 1 B.T.A. 86 ; 1924 BTA LEXIS 252 ; November 21, 1924 , decided Submitted November 12, 1924 . *252 Appeal dismissed as premature. Okey K. … Until the determination is so made and the so-called 60-day letter sent, the taxpayer *253 is entitled to no appeal to this Board, since there is no determination of the Commissioner that can be reviewed.

Cranston v. Commissioner

5 B.T.A. 993 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 5, 1927

CRANSTON, PETITIONERS, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Cranston v. Commissioner Docket No. 3890. … Cranston as executors, and Hazel V. Cranston as executrix.

Leininger v. Commissioner

19 B.T.A. 621 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 16, 1930

LEININGER, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Leininger v. Commissioner Docket Nos. 15295, 23917. … See ; *2374 ; Hellman v. United States (Ct. Cls., May 2, 1927), Am. Fed. Tax Rep. 6781; .

Van Etten v. Commissioner

8 B.T.A. 611 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 8, 1927

Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered on 15 days' notice, v/nder Bule 50.

Hardy v. Commissioner

43 B.T.A. 911 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 13, 1941

Treadwell v. Nickel, 228 Pac. 25 ; Klein Norton Co. v. Cohen, 290 Pac. 613 . On these propositions of law, we understand the parties to be in agreement. … Sargent, 106 Cal. 541 ; 39 Pac. 931 ; In re Jones’ Estate, 118 Cal. 499 ; 50 Pac. 766 ; In re Martin's Estate, 137 Pac. 2 ; Brown v.

Appeal of Boston Structural Steel Co.

1 B.T.A. 1004 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 13, 1925

The Board can not agree with the first contention of the Commissioner. … See the case of Brick v. Brick, 98 U. S. 514 . The second contention of the Commissioner depends upon the meaning of the word “ controlled,” as used in section 204 (b) of the Revenue Act of 1918.

George v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 765 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 20, 1933

See United States v. Anderson, 269 U. S. 422 ; Max Schott, 5 B. T. A. 79. Discussing the question as to when a taxpayer is properly held to be on an accrual basis, the Supreme Court, in Aluminum Casting Co. v. … Niles Bement Pond Co. v. United States, 281 U. S. 357, 360 , 50 S. Ct. 251 , 74 L. Ed. 901 ; U. S. v. Anderson, supra, 269 U. S., pages 442, 443, 46 S. Ct. 131 ; 70 L.

Schweitzer v. Commissioner

30 B.T.A. 155 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 20, 1934

The petitioner cites Smith v. Commis sioner, 59 Fed. (2d) 56, reversing Emma Louise Smith, 23 B.T.A. 631 ; Bessie R. J ones, 27 B.T.A. 171 ; and Iola Wise Stetson, 27 B.T.A. 173 . In Smith v. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the resfondent. Marquette and VaN Fossan dissent.

American Sec. & Trust Co. v. Commissioner

24 B.T.A. 334 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 16, 1931

If Congress had chosen to impose an excise directly upon the gift, as it formerly did, the Fifth Amendment would not have prevented, Bromley v. McCaughn, 280 U. … Adkins v. Children's Hospital, 261 U. S. 525 . Cf. Rita O'Shaughnessy, Executrix, 21 B. T. A. 1046. Arundell agrees with this dissent.

Wilson Furs, Inc. v. Commissioner

29 B.T.A. 319 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 14, 1933

The Board has considered the question of the deduction of reserves in a number of cases. In William J. … Woolford Realty Co. v. Rose, 286 U.S. 319 ; Planters Cotton Oil Co. v. Hopkins, 285 U.S. 533 . To the same effect, see Kaiwiki Sugar Co. v.

Birkin v. Commissioner

5 B.T.A. 402 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 9, 1926

Notwithstanding the great respect to which that high officer’s opinion is entitled, it is not determinative before this Board. … The Board is required by the statute to decide in accordance with the law as it understands it and as authoritatively adjudicated by the courts.

McDonald v. Commissioner

23 B.T.A. 521 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 29, 1931

ELI MCDONALD, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. McDonald v. Commissioner Docket No. 21042. … the decision of this Board and remanded the cause to the Board with directions to reinstate the appeal and redetermine the *1872 deficiency in question.

Guarantee Liquid Measure Co. v. Commissioner

20 B.T.A. 758 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 11, 1930

GUARANTEE LIQUID MEASURE CO., PETITIONER v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Guarantee Liquid Measure Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 36029. … At the same meeting the board of directors adopted the following resolution: On motion of Mr. Wolf duly seconded by Mr. Harry C. Fry, Jr., and carried, Mr.

Untermyer v. Commissioner

11 B.T.A. 405 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 3, 1928

Littleton: From the facts in this proceeding, the Board holds that collection of the proposed deficiency for the year 1917 is barred by the statute of limitation of five years. New York & Albany Lighterage Co. v.

Abell v. Commissioner

4 B.T.A. 87 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 23, 1926

SteRnhagen: The issue upon which the determination of these appeals rests is the same in all respects as that decided by the Board in *91 the Appeals of Louise P. V. Whitcomb et al., 4 B. T.