Case law

Sand Springs R. Co. v. Commissioner

31 B.T.A. 392 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 23, 1934

Gould v. Evansville & Crawford Railway Co., 91 U. S. 526 . The ^rules' of practice of the Board do not permit a technical demurrer. … We hold that the decision of this Board in Sand Springs Railway Co., supra, is res judicata of the present proceedings. New Orleans v. Citizens Bank, supra; Larsen v. Northland Transportation Co., supra; Tait v.

French & Co. v. Commissioner

10 B.T.A. 665 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 13, 1928

Relfe v. Rundle, 103 U. S. 222, 226 ; Howarth v. Lombard, 175 Massachusetts, 570; Howarth v. Angle, 162 N. Y. 179, 182 . … Reviewed by the Board.

Perkins v. Commissioner

36 B.T.A. 791 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 3, 1937

Certain principles have, however, been enunciated by the courts and the Board which aid in arriving at the solution of the problem presented. … v.

Clarke v. Commissioner

22 B.T.A. 314 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 24, 1931

V. … V.

Johnston v. Commissioner

14 B.T.A. 605 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 6, 1928

In Mesce v. United States, 64 Ct. Cls. 481, the ordinance passed by the city council, of the City of Chicago authorized the board of local improvements “to employ” real estate experts. … Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell, 269 U. S. 514 ; Lyons v. Reinecke, 10 Fed. (2d) 3; Mesce v. United States, supra; R. Clipston Sturgis, 10 B. T. A. 1394; George W. Fuller, 9 B. T. A. 108; Fred H. Tibbetts, supra; Emma B.

Cape Henry Syndicate v. Commissioner

30 B.T.A. 794 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 23, 1934

United States v. Dakota-Montana Oil Co., 288 U.S. 459 . Cf. art. 231. But he may not alter, amend, modify, or change the provisions of the act by regulations, Morrill v. Jones, 106 U.S. 466 ; Ramsey v. … The District Court, in deciding Boyne City Lumber Co. v.

Baird v. Commissioner

43 B.T.A. 415 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 22, 1941

This is said to be supported by the Board’s findings of fact. … Davison v. Commissioner, 60 Fed. (2d) 50; State Consolidated Oil Co. v. Commissioner, 66 Fed. (2d) 648; Fifth Street Building v. Commissioner, 77 Fed. (2d) 605; Helvering v.

Livezey v. Commissioner

15 B.T.A. 806 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 12, 1929

In the recent case of Blair v. … McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316 ; Gillespie v. Oklahoma, 257 U. S. 501 ; Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell, 269 U. S. 514 ; Panhandle Oil Co. v. State, 297 U. S. 218 .

Strickland v. Commissioner

16 B.T.A. 419 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 9, 1929

Hall v. Wisconsin, supra; Auffmordt v. Hedden, 137 U. S. 310 . … See United States v. Maurice, 2 Brock. 96, 102, 103 ; Untied States v. Germaine, 99 U. S. 508, 511, 512 ; Adams v.

L. J. Christopher Co. v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 746 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 13, 1933

assigned this action of the Board as error. … Williamsport Wire Rope Co. v. United States, 277 U. S. 551 ; Duquesne Steel Foundry Co. v. Burnet, 283 U. S. 799 .

Bond, Inc. v. Commissioner

12 B.T.A. 339 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 4, 1928

On December 1,1927, Bond, Incorporated, filed a petition with the Board for a redetermination of such deficiency. The pertinent portions of the petition read: Bond, Incorporated, Petitioner, v. … Reviewed by the Board.

Sanborn Bros. v. Commissioner

14 B.T.A. 1059 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 8, 1929

California National Supply Co. v. Flack, 183 Cal. 124 ; 190 Pac. 634 ; Van Landingham v. United Tuna Packers, 208 Pac. 973 . … Caire, 174 Cal. 74 ; 161 Pac. 1161 ; see also Rossi v. Caire, 199 Pac. 1042 ; Ransome-Crummey Co. v. Superior Court, 205 Pac. 446 .

Shell Co. of California v. Commissioner

10 B.T.A. 1324 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 12, 1928

The matter of granting the respondent additional time in which to answer being within the discretion of the Board, as .decided in Shults Bread Co. v. Commissioner, 10 B. T. … By the Board: (Signed) C. Rogers Arundell, Member, United States Board of Tax Appeals. Dated March 12, 1928. Sternhagen, Van Fossan, and Murdock dissent.

Block v. Commissioner

39 B.T.A. 338 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 7, 1939

A. 45; aff'd., 50 Fed. (2d) 158; Carr v. Commissioner, 28 Fed. (2d) 551, affirming a Board decision; Commissioner v. Liberty Bank & Trust Co., 59 Fed. (2d) 320; Cooper v. … Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered u/nder Rule 50.

Pink v. Commissioner

38 B.T.A. 182 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 26, 1938

On February 23, 1938, a petition was filed with this Board, captioned “Louis H. Pink, Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, as Liquidator of Lawyers Mortgage Company, Petitioner, v. … Lion Bonding Co. v. Karatz, 282 U. S. 77 ; O’Neil v. Welch, 245 Fed. 261 .

Edward Barron Estate Co. v. Commissioner

34 B.T.A. 1256 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 30, 1936

A. 22, it has been''consistently held that a petition is-not filed until it is officially deposited with the Board. This means at its office. Lewis-Hall Iron Works v. Blair, 23 Fed. (2d) 972; certiorari denied, 277 U. … See Poyner v. Commissioner, 81 Fed. (2d) 521. Reviewed by the Board.' The proceeding will he dismissed.

Thirst Quenchers of Ohio, Inc. v. Glander

47 Ohio Law. Abs. 175 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 3, 1946

See Steward v Evatt, 143 Oh St 547. … Peter v Parkinson, Treasurer, 83 Oh St 36 at 47, 93 N. E. 197 ; State ex rel v Pierce, 95 Oh St 44, 117 N. E. 6 ; Frisbie Co. v E. Cleveland, 98 Oh St 266, 120 N. E. 309 ; J. S.

Central Union Trust Co. v. Commissioner

18 B.T.A. 300 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 20, 1929

Williams v. Morgan, 111 U. S. 684 ; Minot v. Masten, 95 Fed. 737 ; Farmers Loan & Trust Co. v. Toledo Ry. Co., 67 Fed. 49 . Such appears to be the case here. … Beviewed by the Board. Van Fossan dissents.

Financial & Industrial Sec. Corp. v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 989 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 24, 1933

This Board of course has no power to adopt a construction at variance with the meaning which the legislature apparently intended. Bowers v. New York & Albany Lighterage Co., 273 U. S. 346 . … The Board lacks jurisdiction, and for this reason, The proceeding is dismissed. Reviewed by the Board. Lansdon and Van Fossan dissent.

American Smelting & Refining Co. v. Commissioner

44 B.T.A. 131 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 9, 1941

The courts have gone even further than the Board in permitting amendments to original petitions filed. See Chicago Railway Equipment Co. v. Blair (C. C. … In Denholm & McKay Co., supra, the Board held: On consideration of the opinions of the Circuit Courts of Appeal of the two cited cases [Rieck v. Commissioner, supra, and Commissioner v.