Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
1.60s
Harris-Emery Co. v. Commissioner
37 B.T.A. 958 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 1, 1938
Blair v. Chicago, 201 U. S. 400 .) In *965 so far as the grantee is concerned, it has a right not unlike that which a lessee under a lease contract acquires. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will l>e entered v/nder Rule 50.
Cited 0 timesPublished32 B.T.A. 1258 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 23, 1935
It having been apparently conceded both before the Board and here that if the Board’s interpretation of Act 212 was erroneous, and if the income liere involved was derived from an estate by the entirety, it was all taxable … Battjes Fuel & Buildmig Material Co. v. Milanowski, 236 Mich. 622 ; Peoples State Bank of Pontiac v. Reckling, 252 Mich. 833 ; American State Trust Co. v. Rosenthal, 255 Mich. 157 ; Bankers Trust Co. v.
Cited 4 timesPublished38 B.T.A. 1417 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 16, 1938
When the question arises before the Board the taxpayer must prove the fact of worthlessness. The evidence must be such as reasonably to convince the Board that the accounts were in fact worthless. … Both petitioners and respondent rely on Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 Fed. (2d) 540 (C. C. A., 2d Cir.).
Cited 6 timesPublishedR. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Commissioner
35 B.T.A. 949 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 27, 1937
It is not supported by any decision which has come to our attention except those of the Board. In Knickerbocker Imp. Co. v. Board of Assessors, 74 N. J. Law 583, 585, 65 A. 913, 915 , 7 L. R. A. (N. … A. 941; reversed, Commissioner v. Boca Ceiga Development Co., 66 Fed. (2d) 1004; and despite the decisions of the Board in Houghton & Dutton Co., 26 B. T. A. 52; James D. Robinson, 21 B. T. A. 1018; affd., Robinson v.
Cited 5 timesPublishedAlabama Hardware Co. v. Commissioner
7 B.T.A. 1178 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 29, 1927
A proceeding in court may be begun for any part of the amount, claim for which is allowed by the Board. … Co. v.
Cited 0 timesPublished37 B.T.A. 223 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 28, 1938
S. 683 , and Winmill v. Commissioner, 93 Fed. (2d) 494, affirming the Board at 35 B. T. A. 804, on this point. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered mder Rule 50.
Cited 0 timesPublishedSurety Finance Co. of Tacoma v. Commissioner
27 B.T.A. 616 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 31, 1933
Co. v. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the respondent.
Cited 6 timesPublished35 B.T.A. 706 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 23, 1937
Then March 30, 1928, the Board promulgated its decision in Victor G. Marquissee, 11 B. T. A. 334; affd., sub nom Lewis v. Commissioner, 47 Fed. (2d) 32. … Missouri Insurance Co. v. Gehner, supra. There may be expressions in the opinion of the court and Board in the Marquissee case, supra, which are inconsistent with statements of the Board in the Knox case, supra.
Cited 8 timesPublished18 B.T.A. 736 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jan 10, 1930
Docker was retained at the same monthly compensation at the will of the Board. … See Blair v. Howard,-U. S.-, decided December 9, 1929, and, we, accordingly, hold that the compensation paid by the irrigation districts to these petitioners is not exempt from Federal taxation.
Cited 1 timesPublishedGrowers Cold Storage Co. v. Commissioner
17 B.T.A. 1279 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 7, 1929
The Board held that it was not a business league, and that it was not required to operate at cost. … In Kansas City Hay Dealers’ Assn. v.
Cited 3 timesPublished38 B.T.A. 754 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 7, 1938
It occupied a substantial part of the time of the board members. … Metcalf & Eddy v. Mitchell, 269 U. S. 514 ; Board of Trustees v. United States, 289 U. S. 48 .
Cited 0 timesPublishedGibson Amusement Co. v. Commissioner
22 B.T.A. 1212 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 16, 1931
the authority of Com’r. of Internal Revenue v. … Avery v. Commissioner, 22 Fed. (2d) 6. This burden of proof petitioner has not sustained. Reviewed by the Board. Decision will be entered, for the respondent.
Cited 7 timesPublished18 B.T.A. 86 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 9, 1929
The Board is not a court, Old Colony Trust Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 279 U. … A. 1119, and Peerless Woolen Mills v. Rose, 24 Fed. (2d) 576. We find no conflict between the decision in the Kelley case and the decisions of the Board.
Cited 3 timesPublished28 B.T.A. 988 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 11, 1933
SIMMS, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Simms v. Commissioner Docket Nos. 19175, 19791. … United States v. Phellis, 257 U.S. 156 ; Weiss v. Stearn, 265 U.S. 242 . The foregoing principles have been consistently followed by the Board. Anna M. Harkness, 1 B.T.A. 127 ; B. F. Saul, 4 B.T.A. 639 ; William H.
Cited 13 timesPublishedJohn A. Gebelein, Inc. v. Commissioner
37 B.T.A. 605 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 31, 1938
The notice need not be in any special form or advise the taxpayer of his right to file a petition with the Board, Ventura Consolidated Oil Fields v. Bogan, supra; Commissioner v. … Reviewed by the Board. Hill concurs only in the result.
Cited 8 timesPublishedOesterlein Machine Co. v. Commissioner
1 B.T.A. 159 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 11, 1924
the Board and its divisions and all evidence received by the Board and its divisions * * * shall be public records open to the inspection of the public * * *. … The United States Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, in the case of United States v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedMorriss Realty Co. v. Commissioner
23 B.T.A. 1076 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 10, 1931
And it was said in White v. … Where the ancestral element has been present and the evident object of a trust has been liquidation of property, the Board has followed the principle of Blair v.
Cited 5 timesPublished47 B.T.A. 942 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 27, 1942
Board of Tax Appeals v. United States ex rel. … Erving v. Dwyer, 18 B. T. A. 319; Reliance Manufacturing Co. v. Blair, 19 Fed. (2d) 798; Weaver v. Blair, 19 Fed. (2d) 16.
Cited 4 timesPublished10 B.T.A. 656 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 10, 1928
Cls. 126, and Ward v. Hopkins, U. S. District Court, Texas. The latter case, for some reason went no higher than the district court, and the Board has already said in the Appeal of Even Realty Co., 1 B. T. … In United States v. Ludey, 274 U. S. 295 , 47 S.
Cited 0 timesPublished24 B.T.A. 299 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Oct 7, 1931
A. 391; Baltzell v. Mitchell, 3 Fed. (2d) 428; certiorari denied, 268 U. S. 690 ; Whitcomb v. Blair, 25 Fed. (2d) 528; affirming Louis P. V. Whitcomb et al., 4 B. T. A. 80; Abell v. Tail, 30 Fed. (2d) 54; Hubbell v. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be entered for the respondent.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna