General Lead Batteries Co. v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Evidence held insufficient to prove the claimed value of patents transferred to the taxpayer for its capital stock upon organization. Where the Commissioner by his answer alleges an affirmative defense, the burden is upon him to prove the facts alleged.
1Opinion of the Court
*394OPINION.
Ivins:
This appeal primarily involves the question of the value of intangible assets paid in for stock upon the organization of the taxpayer. Value is always a question of fact and not of speculation. It is only provable by relevant, competent, and material evidence.
During the course of the introduction of the evidence there were references to several different companies, all of which existed prior to the organization of the taxpayer — the Baltimore Electric Storage Battery Co., the Titan Storage Battery Co., and the General Industries Co. No evidence was adduced showing the earnings…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Squire v. DenmanDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1936
- Lippolis v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2017
- Brent v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1927
- Emil G. Seip v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1946
- General Lead Batteries Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1925