E. B. Crabtree Co. v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

E. B. Crabtree Co. v. Commissioner

5 B.T.A. 732, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2789

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedDecember 8, 1926

DocketDocket No. 5889.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 5 B.T.A. 732 (E. B. Crabtree Co. v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

E. B. Crabtree Co. v. Commissioner, 5 B.T.A. 732, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2789 (bta 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

[733]*733OPINION.

Trammell:

The petitioner contends that the respondent erred:

(1) In reducing invested capital by the prorated income and profits taxes for 1919.

(2) In reducing invested capital by the amount of unpaid income and profits taxes for 1918.

(3) In reducing earnings available for distribution as dividends by computing a tentative tax thereon.

The first two contentions must be denied upon the authority of Appeal of Russel Wheel & Foundry Co., 3 B. T. A. 1168; Appeal of B. F. Boyer Co., 4 B. T. A. 180; Appeal of Randall Brothers, Inc., 4 B. T. A. 291; Appeal of Chicago Railway Equipment Co., 4 B. T. A. 452; Appeal of Manville Jenckes Co., 4 B. T. A. 765; Appeal of Herald-Despatch Co., 4 B. T. A. 1096; Appeal of Henderson Cotton Mills, 4 B. T. A. 1212.

The petitioner’s third contention, in our opinion, is correct. The earnings available for distribution as dividends should not be reduced by the amount of a “tentative tax” theoretically set aside out of such earnings pro rata over the year. Appeal of L. S. Ayers & Co., 1 B. T. A. 1135; Appeal of Georgia Car & Locomotive Co., 2 B. T. A. 986; Appeal of Rhode Island Tool Co., 3 B. T. A. 180; Appeal of Washington Hotel Co., 4 B. T. A. 441; Appeal of Amalgamated Sugar Co., 4 B. T. A. 568; Appeal of Gardner Governor Co., 5 B. T. A. 70.

Judgment will he entered on 15 days’ notice, under Rule 50.

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

[733]*733OPINION.

Trammell:

The petitioner contends that the respondent erred:

(1) In reducing invested capital by the prorated income and profits taxes for 1919.

(2) In reducing invested capital by the amount of unpaid income and profits taxes for 1918.

(3) In reducing earnings available for distribution as dividends by computing a tentative tax thereon.

The first two contentions must be denied upon the authority of Appeal of Russel Wheel & Foundry Co., 3 B. T. A. 1168; Appeal of B. F. Boyer Co., 4 B. T. A. 180; Appeal of Randall Brothers, Inc., 4 B. T. A. 291; Appeal of Chicago Railway Equipment Co., 4 B. T. A. 452; Appeal of Manville Jenckes Co., 4 B. T. A. 765; Appeal of Herald-Despatch Co., 4 B. T. A. 1096; Appeal of Henderson Cotton Mills, 4 B. T. A. 1212.

The petitioner’s third contention, in our opinion, is correct. The earnings available for distribution as dividends should not be reduced by the amount of a “tentative tax” theoretically set aside out of such earnings pro rata over the year. Appeal of L. S. Ayers & Co., 1 B. T. A. 1135; Appeal of Georgia Car & Locomotive Co., 2 B. T. A. 986; Appeal of Rhode Island Tool Co., 3 B. T. A. 180; Appeal of Washington Hotel Co., 4 B. T. A. 441; Appeal of Amalgamated Sugar Co., 4 B. T. A. 568; Appeal of Gardner Governor Co., 5 B. T. A. 70.

Judgment will he entered on 15 days’ notice, under Rule 50.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 B.T.A. 732, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2789, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/e-b-crabtree-co-v-commissioner-bta-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack