Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersbta

10,000+ results

1.59s

  • National Outdoor Advertising Bureau, Inc. v. Commissioner

    32 B.T.A. 1025 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 25, 1935

    A. 441; affirmed on this point in Garden Homes Co. v. … A. 114, 118, South Carolina Produce Association v. Commissioner, 50 Fed. (2d) 742, affirming 19 B. T. A. 1028; Riverdale Co-operative Creamery Association v. Commissioner, 48 Fed. (2d) 711.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Bowen v. Commissioner

    27 B.T.A. 824 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 28, 1933

    Since these cases were decided the Supreme Court has ruled upon the question in Eckert v. Burnet, 283 U. S. 140 . … The respondent questioned this value and the petitioner had a second appraisal made in 1928 by the Allentown Real Estate Board, which put the 1913 value of the land at $195,000.

    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
  • Roshek Bros. Co. v. Commissioner

    2 B.T.A. 260 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 30, 1925

    Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 1844. United States Board of Tax Appeals 2 B.T.A. 260 ; 1925 BTA LEXIS 2494 ; June 30, 1925 , Decided Submitted May 1, 1925 . *2494 1. Increased depreciation allowed. 2. … On this point the Board must sustain the Commissioner, on the authority of the .

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Vanderbilt v. Commissioner

    11 B.T.A. 291 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 29, 1928

    It was so decided in United States v. … Tliis principle of law was recognized by this Board in W. E. Caldwell Co., Inc., 6 B. T. A. 47, where the Board said: The reasoning advanced in the Stange case [Appeal of A. II. Stange, 1 B. T.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Valvoline Oil Co. v. Commissioner

    47 B.T.A. 795 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 6, 1942

    We are of the opinion that under the holding of the Supreme Court in Helvering v. … Reviewed by the Board. Decision will he entered under Rule 50. Disney concurs only in the result. SEC. 26. CREDITS OF CORPORATIONS.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • American Chicle Co. v. Commissioner

    23 B.T.A. 221 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 14, 1931

    Following the principle laid down in Bowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co., 271 U. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will he entered under Bule 50.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Resthaven Memorial Cemetery v. Commissioner

    30 B.T.A. 383 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 13, 1934

    See Burnet v. San Joaguin Fruit & Investment Co., 52 Fed. (2d) 123; Commissioner v. New York Trust Co., 54 Fed. (2d) 463. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered under Bule SO.

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

    18 B.T.A. 443 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 6, 1929

    GOLDIE OIL & GAS CO., PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Goldie Oil & Gas Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 25281. … United States Board of Tax Appeals 18 B.T.A. 443 ; 1929 BTA LEXIS 2043 ; December 6, 1929 , Promulgated *2043 Held, that the evidence is not sufficient to establish petitioner's claim that its tax for 1920 should be computed

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Edward Hines Lumber Co. v. Commissioner

    35 B.T.A. 364 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 29, 1937

    S. 677 ; Seiberling Rubber Co. v. Commissioner, 70 Fed. (2d) 651, affirming a Board memorandum opinion of June 29, 1932; certiorari denied, 293 U. S. 611 ; Corco Oil Refining Corporation v. … Reviewed by the Board. Decision will he entered wnder Bule 60.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • American Tel. & Cable Co. v. Commissioner

    17 B.T.A. 783 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 7, 1929

    Sternhagen : The first issue presents the identical question which has been decided adversely to petitioner by the Board as to 1919, American Telegraph & Cable Co., 2 B. T. … A. 991, decided October 26, 1925, and as to 1922 by the Court of Claims in American Telegraph & Gable Co. v. United States, 61 Ct. Cls. 326, certiorari denied, 271 U. S. 660 .

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Heipershausen v. Commissioner

    18 B.T.A. 218 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 14, 1929

    Myer v. United States, 60 Ct. Cls. 474; Anna L. Stark Lavelle, Executrix, 8 B. T. A. 1150, 1156. … Starch Lavelle, Executrix, supra; Rea v. Heiner, 6 Fed. (2d) 389.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Bank of New York & Trust Co. v. Commissioner

    21 B.T.A. 197 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 5, 1930

    Y. 288 ; Manning v. Board of Tax Commissioners, 40 E. I. 400; In re Murphy Estate, 102 Cal. 740 , and others. … Reviewed by the Board'. Judgment will be entered, wider Bule 50. MuRdock concurs in the result only.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Harnischfeger v. Commissioner

    31 B.T.A. 224 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 3, 1934

    In United States v. … The decision of the state court has no binding effect on the Board. Joseph Edward Phillips, Executor, 7 B.T.A. 1054 ; Commissioner v. Nevin, supra.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • E. B. Higley & Co. v. Commissioner

    25 B.T.A. 127 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 11, 1932

    In United States v. Kirby Lumber *128 Co., 284 U. … Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered under Rule 50. Marquette and Sternhagen dissent.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Mobile Delivery Co. v. Commissioner

    8 B.T.A. 1224 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 5, 1927

    MOBILE DELIVERY CO., PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Mobile Delivery Co. v. Commissioner Docket No. 7124. … Should there be a tie vote, in the Board of Directors, on any proposition, the said Board shall call in an umpire and his decision shall be final.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Earl v. Commissioner

    10 B.T.A. 723 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 14, 1928

    In the case of Blair v. … United States v. Robbins, 269 U. S. 315 . In view of the foregoing, it is our opinion that the amounts received by the petitioner as salary, fees, etc., should be taxable to him. Reviewed by the Board.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Weiller v. Commissioner

    18 B.T.A. 1121 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 13, 1930

    S. 327 , and Reinicke v. Northern Trust Co., 278 U. S. 339 . … Section 808 (e) of the Revenue Act of 1926 specifically gives this Board jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency in tax greater than that determined by the respondent if claim for such greater amount “is asserted by the

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Vancoh Realty Co. v. Commissioner

    33 B.T.A. 918 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 17, 1936

    A. 717, and cases relied on therein, dismissed on motion of the Commissioner, 77 Fed. (2d) 994; Commissioner v. Central Republic Trust Co., 75 Fed. (2d) 708; Helvering v. … Decision will be entered v/nder Rule 50. Art. 153.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Chase v. Commissioner

    44 B.T.A. 39 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 3, 1941

    Helvering v. Bashford, 302 U. S. 454 . … United States v. Stewart, 311 U. S. 60 .

    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.