Head Ski Company, Inc. v. United States

Fourth Circuit

Head Ski Company, Inc. v. United States

454 F.2d 732, 29 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 496, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11618

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 26, 1972

Docket71-1544

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 454 F.2d 732 (Head Ski Company, Inc. 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

Head Ski Company, Inc. v. United States, 454 F.2d 732, 29 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 496, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11618 (4th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The government appeals from the entry of summary judgment in favor of Head Ski Company granting a refund of income tax for 1965. 1

The sole issue is whether a premium Head Ski paid for the redemption of a convertible note was deductible as a business expense or nondeductible as a capital outlay. Applying Treasury Regulation § 1.61-12(e) (1) (1965), 2 the district court held that the premium was deductible. In reaching this conclusion, it relied primarily on Southwest Grease & Oil Company, Inc. v. United States, 435 F.2d 675 (10th Cir. 1971), and Roberts & Porter, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 307 F.2d 745 (7th Cir. 1962), which in their material aspects are indistinguishable. We affirm.

1

. Head Ski Co. v. United States, 323 F. S,upp. 1383 (D.Md.1971).

2

. Tlie transaction occurred before the effective date of 26 U.S.C. § 249 (1969), which contains a limitation on the deduction of a premium paid to repurchase convertible obligations.

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

PER CURIAM:

The government appeals from the entry of summary judgment in favor of Head Ski Company granting a refund of income tax for 1965. 1

The sole issue is whether a premium Head Ski paid for the redemption of a convertible note was deductible as a business expense or nondeductible as a capital outlay. Applying Treasury Regulation § 1.61-12(e) (1) (1965), 2 the district court held that the premium was deductible. In reaching this conclusion, it relied primarily on Southwest Grease & Oil Company, Inc. v. United States, 435 F.2d 675 (10th Cir. 1971), and Roberts & Porter, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 307 F.2d 745 (7th Cir. 1962), which in their material aspects are indistinguishable. We affirm.

1

. Head Ski Co. v. United States, 323 F. S,upp. 1383 (D.Md.1971).

2

. Tlie transaction occurred before the effective date of 26 U.S.C. § 249 (1969), which contains a limitation on the deduction of a premium paid to repurchase convertible obligations.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

454 F.2d 732, 29 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 496, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/head-ski-company-inc-v-united-states-ca4-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack