California Vegetable Union v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

California Vegetable Union v. Commissioner

5 B.T.A. 795, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2780

United States Board of Tax Appeals·Decided December 14, 1926·No. Docket No. 5209.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[796] OPINION.

Morris:

There is no evidence to sustain any of the allegations of fact made by the petitioner. The Commissioner’s determination will therefore have to be sustained. As to the proposition of law relative to reduction of invested capital because of taxes for the preceding taxable period, Congress has definitely settled any question in this regard by section 1207 of the Revenue Act of 1926. See Russel Wheel & Foundry Co., 3 B. T. A. 1168.

Judgment will be entered for the Commissioner.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[796] OPINION.

Morris:

There is no evidence to sustain any of the allegations of fact made by the petitioner. The Commissioner’s determination will therefore have to be sustained. As to the proposition of law relative to reduction of invested capital because of taxes for the preceding taxable period, Congress has definitely settled any question in this regard by section 1207 of the Revenue Act of 1926. See Russel Wheel & Foundry Co., 3 B. T. A. 1168.

Judgment will be entered for the Commissioner.

California Vegetable Union v. Commissioner, 5 B.T.A. 795, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2780 (bta 1926).

Pincite

5 B.T.A. 795 (California Vegetable Union v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related