Pulte Home Corporation v. Commissioner Of Internal Revenue

771 F.2d 183, 56 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5878, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 22783
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit·Decided September 9, 1985·No. 84-1623·Published

Opinion

771 F.2d 183

56 A.F.T.R.2d 85-5878, 85-2 USTC P 9660

PULTE HOME CORPORATION, Pulte Land of Illinois Corporation,
Pulte Land of Michigan Corporation, Pulte Homes of
Michigan Corporation, and Pulte Homes of
Illinois Corporation,
Petitioners-Appellants,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 84-1623.

United States Court of Appeals,
Sixth Circuit.

Argued Aug. 1, 1985.
Decided Sept. 9, 1985.

ON APPEAL from the United States Tax Court.

Stephen Wasinger, argued, Honigman, Miller, Schwartz & Cohn, Detroit, Mich., for petitioners-appellants.

Fred T. Goldberg, Jr., Chief Counsel, I.R.S., Glenn L. Archer, Jr., Michael L. Paup, Asst. Attys. Gen., Dept. of Justice, Tax Div., Ann Belanger Durney, George L. Hastings, Jr., argued, Washington, D.C., for respondent-appellee.

Before KRUPANSKY and MILBURN, Circuit Judges, and NEESE, Senior (Retired District) Judge*.

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the briefs and record herein and after oral argument, the judgment of the Tax Court is AFFIRMED for the reasons stated in the entered opinion of the Tax Court reported at 46 T.C.M. (CCH) 1238 (1983).

*

The Honorable C.G. Neese, now of Nashville, Tennessee, sitting by designation, retired as a district judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee

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

Pulte Home Corporation v. Commissioner Of Internal Revenue, 771 F.2d 183, 56 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5878, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 22783 (6th Cir. 1985).

771 F.2d 183 (Pulte Home Corporation v. Commissioner Of Internal Revenue) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Steinberg v. Commissioner
1983 T.C. Memo. 534 (U.S. Tax Court, 1983)
Pulte Home Corp. v. Commissioner
771 F.2d 183 (Sixth Circuit, 1985)