Moening & Heckmann v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board
United States Tax Court
In 1943 M and H were equal general partners carrying on two separate partnership businesses. Both partnerships produced machine tools, but the type of machine tools produced by each differed from that produced by the other.
Read the full summary
In 1943 M and H were equal general partners carrying on two separate partnership businesses. Both partnerships produced machine tools, but the type of machine tools produced by each differed from that produced by the other. The combined renegotiable receipts of the two partnerships in 1943 exceeded $ 500,000, but the renegotiable receipts of each were less than $ 500,000. (1) Held, the two partnership businesses were under common control within meaning of section 403 (c) (6) of the Renegotiation Act. (2) Held, petitioners have not proved that respondent erred in failing to exempt contracts…
1Opinion of the Court
William C. Moening and Harry A. Heckmann -- Copartners Doing Business Under the Name and Style of the United States Drill Head Company, Petitioner, v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board, Respondent. William C. Moening and Harry A. Heckmann -- Copartners Doing Business Under the Name and Style of the United States Machine Tool Company, Petitioner, v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board, Respondent
Moening & Heckmann v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board
Docket Nos. 413-R, 414-R
United States Tax Court
14 T.C. 589; 1950 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 225;
April 17, 1950, Promulgated
In 1943 M and H were…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Lichter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Stein Bros. Mfg. Co. v. Secretary of WarUnited States Tax Court · 1946
- Grob Bros. v. Secretary of WarUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Nat'l Elec. Welding Machs. Co. v. StimsonUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Greaves v. War Contracts Price Adjustment BoardUnited States Tax Court · 1948
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.