Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersbta

10,000+ results

3.16s

  • Van Vorst v. Commissioner

    22 B.T.A. 632 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 9, 1931

    Taplin, Board of Tax Appeals Reports, Volume 12, Number 8, page 1264).” … A. 13; Rose v. Trust Co. of Georgia, 28 Fed. (2d) 767.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • De Van v. Commissioner

    34 B.T.A. 580 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 19, 1936

    The dismissal of her divorce action and resumption of marital relations with her husband was a valid consideration for the execution of the note; Adams v. Adams, 91 N. Y. 381 ; Bowden v. … Likewise, in affirming the Board, the Circuit Court of Appeals said: “The obligation did not lose the character of alimony when incorporated in the note.” We have an entirely different situation here.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Paine v. Commissioner

    37 B.T.A. 427 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 25, 1938

    Using the words “any transaction entered into for profit” in their usual and generic sense (Heiner v. Tindle, 276 U. S. 582 ; Helvering v. Midland, Mutual Life Insurance Co., 300 U. … In Welch v. Helvering, 290 U. S. 111 , the Supreme Court affirmed the Circuit Court (63 Fed. (2d) 976) and the Board, 25 B. T.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Suffolk Sec. Corp. v. Commissioner

    41 B.T.A. 1161 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 15, 1940

    Lucas v. American Code Co., 280 U. S. 445 ; Doyle v. Mitchell Brothers Co., 247 U. S. 179 . Respondent’s action on this issue is approved. … United States v. White Dental Manufacturing Co., 274 U. S. 398 . On October 16, 1930, Smith wrote a letter to James H.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Refling v. Commissioner

    17 B.T.A. 327 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 19, 1929

    REFLING, EXECUTOR, ESTATE OF HAROLD THORSON, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Refling v. Commissioner Docket No. 25230. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the respondent.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • El Paso Elec. Co. v. Commissioner

    10 B.T.A. 79 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 21, 1928

    Relying upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Edwards v. Cuba Railroad Co., 268 U. S. 628 , the Board held that such contributions did not constitute taxable income to the power company. … See also Great Northern Railway Co. v. Commissioner, 8 B. T. A. 225. Respondent was in error. Judgment will be entered on 15 days' notice, under Rule 50.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Gravley v. Commissioner

    44 B.T.A. 722 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 17, 1941

    The “Board is no more bound than is a jury to believe the statements of the most interested witness, even though there be no direct or affirmative evidence to the contrary.” Domestic Management Bureau, Inc., 38 B. T. … Allen v. Commis sioner, 117 Fed. (2d) 364; Wiese v. Commissioner, 93 Fed. (2d) 921; Hugh H. Miller, 25 B. T. A. 418. In the Allen and Miller cases the withdrawals were charged off against surplus.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Long v. Commissioner

    35 B.T.A. 479 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 12, 1937

    A. 936; Henry V. Poor, 11 B. T. A. 781; John H. Wourms, 25 B. T. A. 671; Oscar T. Crosby, 27 B. T. A. 1234. … Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered for the respondent. Murdock and Leech concur only in the result. SteRnhagen, Mellott, Tyson, and Disney dissent.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Knapp v. Commissioner

    40 B.T.A. 1145 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 19, 1939

    KNAPP, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Knapp v. Commissioner Docket No. 91699. … Those annuities were to be paid at times and in such amounts as fixed by the "Service Annuity Board" or board of directors of the company.

    Reversed by Helvering v. Knapp, 121 F.2d 454 (1941)Cited 2 timesPublished
  • M. J. McCabe Co. v. Commissioner

    1 B.T.A. 57 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 10, 1924

    McCabe Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 21. … This appeal was submitted upon the petition and brief of taxpayer and certain admissions of error by the Commissioner from which the Board makes the following FINDINGS OF FACT. (1) The M. J.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Aurora Brewing Co. v. Commissioner

    2 B.T.A. 692 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 30, 1925

    Aurora Brewing Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 2195. … Whereas, it is deemed desirable and necessary by the board of directors of this corporation to make division of the undivided profits among the stockholders, and Whereas, the board of directors, by resolution passed at a

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Parshall v. Commissioner

    7 B.T.A. 318 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 14, 1927

    After the decision of the board in that case, it was carried into the courts, finally to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, and the courts rendered judgment in harmony with the decision rendered by the board, Mitchel … v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Lincoln Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Donahue

    13 Ohio Misc. 234 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 23, 1966

    These three cases are: Southland Stores No. 3, Inc., v. Bowers, 171 Ohio St. 271 ; Cappel v. Glander, Tax Commr., BTA No. 16464 decided December 8, 1949; and First National Bank of Akron v. … See American Issue Publishing Co. v. Evatt, Tax Commr., 137 Ohio St. 264 .”

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Capital City Inv. Co. v. Commissioner

    4 B.T.A. 933 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 22, 1926

    In making such contention it relies upon the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Doyle v. Mitchell Bros. Co., 247 U. … It simply provides, as was pointed out by this Board in Appeal of Even Realty Co., 1 B. T.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Coxe v. Commissioner

    5 B.T.A. 261 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 29, 1926

    Coxe v. Commissioner Docket No. 2121. United States Board of Tax Appeals 5 B.T.A. 261 ; 1926 BTA LEXIS 2904 ; October 29, 1926 , Decided *2904 1. … The Commissioner determined a deficiency in the amount of $43,075.95, from which determination the taxpayer duly filed her appeal with this Board.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Ice Service Co. v. Commissioner

    9 B.T.A. 386 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 28, 1927

    ICE SERVICE CO., INC., AND NATIONAL ICE & COAL CO., PETITIONERS, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Ice Service Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 8930. … United States Board of Tax Appeals 9 B.T.A. 386 ; 1927 BTA LEXIS 2604 ; November 28, 1927 , Promulgated *2604 The petitioning corporations were not affiliated during the year 1921, within the meaning of section 240(c) of

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Stock Yards Bank v. Commissioner

    25 B.T.A. 964 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 23, 1932

    Weiss v. Stearn, 265 U.S. 242 . 2. … In Weiss v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Rail Joint Co. v. Commissioner

    22 B.T.A. 1277 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 22, 1931

    RAIL JOINT COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Rail Joint Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 46003. … The bonds were thereupon canceled and destroyed, and the unexpended balance of the money appropriated was ordered returned to the treasury by the board of directors.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Beatty v. Commissioner

    7 B.T.A. 726 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 26, 1927

    BEATTY, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Beatty v. Commissioner Docket No. 7360. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the respondent.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Gibson v. Commissioner

    44 B.T.A. 950 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 9, 1941

    In my opinion, the Board has drawn inferences from section 115(f)(1) that are not justified, and has attempted to apply the views expressed in Koshland v. … The Board also cites and quotes from the opinion of the Supreme Court in Palmer v.

    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.