Fenco, Inc., a Corporation v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Fenco, Inc., a Corporation v. United States

348 F.2d 456, 16 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5149

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJune 28, 1965

Docket9916_1

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 348 F.2d 456 (Fenco, Inc., a Corporation v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fenco, Inc., a Corporation v. United States, 348 F.2d 456, 16 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5149 (4th Cir. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Accumulated earnings taxes under §§ 531-533, Internal Revenue Code of 1954 were assessed by the Commissioner against Fenco, Inc. who now appeals the judgment of the District Court upholding the assessment. Whether “the earnings and profits of [the] corporation [were] permitted to accumulate beyond the reasonable needs of the business * * * to avoid the income tax with respect to shareholders” was in this case largely a factual determination. The findings of the trial court are certainly not “clearly erroneous” and we accept them. Rule 52, F.R.Civ.P. Nor do we *457 observe fault in the principles of law the Court stated or as it applied them. We affirm for the reasons given by the District Judge in his written opinion, reported as Fenco, Inc. v. United States of America, 234 F.Supp. 317 (D.C.Md. 1964).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Accumulated earnings taxes under §§ 531-533, Internal Revenue Code of 1954 were assessed by the Commissioner against Fenco, Inc. who now appeals the judgment of the District Court upholding the assessment. Whether “the earnings and profits of [the] corporation [were] permitted to accumulate beyond the reasonable needs of the business * * * to avoid the income tax with respect to shareholders” was in this case largely a factual determination. The findings of the trial court are certainly not “clearly erroneous” and we accept them. Rule 52, F.R.Civ.P. Nor do we *457 observe fault in the principles of law the Court stated or as it applied them. We affirm for the reasons given by the District Judge in his written opinion, reported as Fenco, Inc. v. United States of America, 234 F.Supp. 317 (D.C.Md. 1964).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

348 F.2d 456, 16 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fenco-inc-a-corporation-v-united-states-ca4-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack