Godfrey Food Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Relief under section 722 (b) (4), I. R. C., denied where petitioner commenced business, a retail grocery business, and also enlarged its business during its base period, but where the evidence fails to establish a basis for a reconstructive average base period net income which would result in a greater excess profits credit than that allowed by the Commissioner under the invested capital method.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
LeMiRe, Judge:
The petitioner contests the Commissioner’s disal-lowance of its claims for excess profits tax relief under section 722 (a) and (b) (4), quoted in material part below.1
The undisputed facts show, and the Commissioner concedes, that petitioner both commenced business and changed the character of its business during the base period within the meaning of section 722 (b) (4), the section under which petitioner has based its claims for relief. Petitioner began operating its first store, the Long Beach store, on November 1,1938, and opened its second store, the Huntington Park…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Monarch Cap Screw & Mfg. Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1945
- Blum Folding Paper Box Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1945
- Danco Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Wadley Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1951
3Cited by25 opinions
- United Mail Order House v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1956
- Havens Structural Steel Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1958
- Hemenway-Johnson Furniture Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953
- Empire Liquor Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1956
- Franks Mfg. Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1956
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.