Commissioner v. Michigan Silica Co.

124 F.2d 397, 28 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 771, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 2504
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided December 9, 1941·No. No. 8721·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause was heard upon the transcript of the record, briefs and arguments of counsel, and it appearing that the provisions of respondent’s . contract, herein concerned, expressly deal with the disposition of the gross income of respondent and, therefore, necessarily deal with the disposition of the earnings and profits within the taxable year, as required for credit on undistributed profts tax under Section 26(c) (2), of the Revenue Act of 1936, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the order of the Board of Tax Appeals, 41 B.T.A. 511, be and the same is hereby affirmed. See Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Strong Manufacturing Company, 6 Cir., 124 F.2d 360, this day decided.

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

Commissioner v. Michigan Silica Co., 124 F.2d 397, 28 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 771, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 2504 (6th Cir. 1941).

124 F.2d 397 (Commissioner v. Michigan Silica Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Helvering v. Magnus Beck Brewing Co.
132 F.2d 379 (Second Circuit, 1942)