Russell & Co. v. Sancho

92 F.2d 821, 1937 U.S. App. LEXIS 4715
CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit
DecidedNovember 9, 1937
DocketNo. 3236
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 92 F.2d 821 (Russell & Co. v. Sancho) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Russell & Co. v. Sancho, 92 F.2d 821, 1937 U.S. App. LEXIS 4715 (1st Cir. 1937).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This court is unable to say that the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico was clearly wrong in ruling and holding that the machine described in plaintiff’s complaint was a tractor and taxable as such under -the provisions of section 16, par. 8, of the Internal Revenue Law of Puerto Rico 1925, No. 85, as amended by Act No. 83, § 16, par. 8, of 1931.

In this situation the plaintiff cannot recover the additional tax which it paid under protest, and the judgment of the court below will be affirmed.

The judgment of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico is affirmed, with costs to the appellee in this court.

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

Related

Lakewood Fire Protection District v. City of Lakewood
710 P.2d 1124 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1985)
Buscaglia v. Tax Court of Puerto Rico
69 P.R. 706 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1949)
Buscaglia v. Tribunal de Contribuciones de Puerto Rico
69 P.R. Dec. 757 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1949)
Central Aguirre Sugar Co. v. Domenech
115 F.2d 502 (First Circuit, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
92 F.2d 821, 1937 U.S. App. LEXIS 4715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/russell-co-v-sancho-ca1-1937.