Finnie Co. v. United States
United States Tax Court
1. Petitioner, a general partnership, was organized to engage in the performance of war contracts. Its partners directly held 62 per cent of the outstanding stock of the Oliver-Finnie Company, a corporation which had renegotiable receipts in excess of $ 300,000 for 1944. One of petitioner's partners was the wife of an individual who owned 19.96 per cent of the corporation's stock and also was one of its vice presidents.
Read the full summary
1. Petitioner, a general partnership, was organized to engage in the performance of war contracts. Its partners directly held 62 per cent of the outstanding stock of the Oliver-Finnie Company, a corporation which had renegotiable receipts in excess of $ 300,000 for 1944. One of petitioner's partners was the wife of an individual who owned 19.96 per cent of the corporation's stock and also was one of its vice presidents. Both of petitioner's managing partners served the corporation in executive capacities. Held, the petitioner and the corporation were under common control within the meaning of…
1Opinion of the Court
Tietjens, Judge:
This proceeding involves a unilateral determination of the Renegotiation Board that the Finnie Company realized excessive profits in the amount of $95,000 for its fiscal year ended December 31, 1944.
The issues are: (1) Whether the Finnie Company, a partnership, and the Oliver-Finnie Company, a corporation, were under common control during 1944 within the meaning of section 403(c) (6) of the Renegotiation Act of 1943; (2) whether vacuum-packed salted peanuts are exempt from renegotiation as an agricultural commodity within the meaning of section 403(i)(l)(C) of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Spring City Foundry Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Cohen v. Secretary of WarUnited States Tax Court · 1946
- W. L. Moody Cotton Co. v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1944
- W. L. Moody Cotton Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1943
- Warner v. War Contracts Price Adjustment BoardUnited States Tax Court · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Shultz v. Mack Farland & Sons Roofing Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Shultz v. Mack Farland & Sons Roofing Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- S. S. Silberblatt, Inc. v. Renegotiation BoardUnited States Tax Court · 1969
- Beets v. Renegotiation BoardUnited States Tax Court · 1962
- Beets v. Renegotiation BoardUnited States Tax Court · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.