L. J. Christopher Co. of California v. Commissioner

District of Columbia

L. J. Christopher Co. of California v. Commissioner

55 F.2d 532, 60 App. D.C. 370, 10 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1126, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4111, 1931 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9694

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedDecember 14, 1931

DocketNo. 5235

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 55 F.2d 532 (L. J. Christopher Co. of California v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

L. J. Christopher Co. of California v. Commissioner, 55 F.2d 532, 60 App. D.C. 370, 10 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1126, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4111, 1931 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9694 (D.D.C. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

YAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.

The appeal in this ease is dependent upon the same statement of facts, substantially, as contained in L. J. Christopher Co. of Delaware v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (No. 5236) 60 App. D. C. 368, 55F.(2d) 530, this day decided. The only question involved in the present case is whether or not the Board of Tax Appeals was justified in fixing the value Of the good will at the amount shown on the books of the company in 1914 — $17,028.82.

Appellant introduced the testimony of two witnesses to prove that the good will was undervalued on appellant’s books in 1914. This, at most, raised an issue of fact for the board to determine. Appellant had [533]*533the burden of establishing a prima facie ease that the good will should be fixed at more than the figure shown by the book entry. The board has determined that appellant did not successfully sustain this burden and, in view of the testimony of the two witnesses introduced by appellant on this question, we are not prepared to say that the board was unreasonable in bolding this testimony insufficient.

The decision is-affirmed.

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

YAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.

The appeal in this ease is dependent upon the same statement of facts, substantially, as contained in L. J. Christopher Co. of Delaware v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (No. 5236) 60 App. D. C. 368, 55F.(2d) 530, this day decided. The only question involved in the present case is whether or not the Board of Tax Appeals was justified in fixing the value Of the good will at the amount shown on the books of the company in 1914 — $17,028.82.

Appellant introduced the testimony of two witnesses to prove that the good will was undervalued on appellant’s books in 1914. This, at most, raised an issue of fact for the board to determine. Appellant had [533]*533the burden of establishing a prima facie ease that the good will should be fixed at more than the figure shown by the book entry. The board has determined that appellant did not successfully sustain this burden and, in view of the testimony of the two witnesses introduced by appellant on this question, we are not prepared to say that the board was unreasonable in bolding this testimony insufficient.

The decision is-affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 F.2d 532, 60 App. D.C. 370, 10 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 1126, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4111, 1931 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9694, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/l-j-christopher-co-of-california-v-commissioner-dcd-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack