Rio Elec. Co. v. Commissioner

9 B.T.A. 1332, 1928 BTA LEXIS 4250
CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals
DecidedJanuary 16, 1928
DocketDocket No. 12756.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 9 B.T.A. 1332 (Rio Elec. Co. v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rio Elec. Co. v. Commissioner, 9 B.T.A. 1332, 1928 BTA LEXIS 4250 (bta 1928).

Opinion

[1334]*1334OPINION.

Phillips :

This proceeding was submitted upon the pleadings and upon a stipulation of facts', the material portions of which have been incorporated in our findings of fact above. The single question involved is whether the amounts received by the petitioner under contract by which it was to construct an extension of its lines, the cost of which was to be paid by the rual residents of the community served, is taxable as income. The decision of this ques-[1335]*1335lion is governed by the decisions of the Board in Appeal of Liberty Light & Power Co., 4 B. T. A. 155, and Great Northern Railway Co. v. Commissioner, 8 B. T. A. 225, 272, which were in turn based upon the decision and opinion of the court in Edwards v. Cuba Railroad Co., 268 U. S. 628. See also Aransas Compress Co. v. Commissioner, 8 B. T. A. 155.

There is no deficiency. Decision will be entered accordingly.

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

Related

Rio Elec. Co. v. Commissioner
9 B.T.A. 1332 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 B.T.A. 1332, 1928 BTA LEXIS 4250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rio-elec-co-v-commissioner-bta-1928.