Jewel Tea Co. v. United States

15 F. Supp. 56, 17 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1356, 1936 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1143
District Court, S.D. New York·Decided April 22, 1936·Published

Opinion

COXE, District Judge.

The sinking fund provisions of the preferred stock did not create any debtor and creditor relation. Hazel Atlas Glass. Co. v. Van Dyk & Reeves, Inc. (C.C.A.) 8 F.(2d) 716; Commissioner v. O. P. P. Holding Corporation (C.C.A.) 76 F.(2d) 11. United States v. Kirby Lumber Co., 284 U.S. 1, 52 S.Ct. 4, 76 L.Ed. 131, has, therefore, no application. The general rule is that a corporation receives no gain or loss from the purchase of its own stock. Johnson v. Commissioner (C.C.A.) 56 F.(2d) 58, certiorari denied Johnson v. Burnet, 286 U.S. 551, 52 S.Ct. 502, 76 L.Ed. 1287. And on the basis of the facts alleged in the amended complaint, the case is not within the exception recognized in. Commissioner v. S. A. Woods Mach. Co. (C.C.A.) 57 F.(2d) 635, certiorari denied 287 U.S. 613, 53 S.Ct. 15, 77 L.Ed. 532. Neither is the statement in the claim for [57] refund that “all of said purchases were part of a plan of acquiring its entire preferred stock issue” overridden by a general allegation that the transaction was “entered into by petitioner for profit and as part of its trade or business.” Dascomb v. McCuen (C.C.A.) 73 F.(2d) 417.

The motion of the defendant to dismiss is granted.

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

Jewel Tea Co. v. United States, 15 F. Supp. 56, 17 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1356, 1936 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1143 (S.D.N.Y. 1936).

15 F. Supp. 56 (Jewel Tea Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Kirby Lumber Co
284 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1931)
Johnson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
56 F.2d 58 (Fifth Circuit, 1932)
Hazel Atlas Glass Co. v. Van Dyk & Reeves, Inc.
8 F.2d 716 (Second Circuit, 1925)
Dascomb v. McCuen
73 F.2d 417 (Second Circuit, 1934)
Johnson v. Burnet
286 U.S. 551 (Supreme Court, 1932)
Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Squire
286 U.S. 552 (Supreme Court, 1932)
Pan American Petroleum Co. v. United States
287 U.S. 612 (Supreme Court, 1932)