Legal Opinion
Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Shenandoah Co.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided November 9, 1943No. 10745PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HUTCHESON, Circuit Judge.
This petition for review, while vigorously argued by the commissioner, seems on the record before us to have little of substance in it. If the judgment is right and should be affirmed, the taxpayer will pay no tax. Neither apparently will he if it is wrong. For the commissioner concedes that if his position, that the dividend, for which taxpayer claims a dividends paid credit, in part effected a deficit in surplus and, therefore, constituted a distribution of capital, is correct, the cause must be remanded to the Tax Court to permit taxpayer to there claim the benefit…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. WS Farish & Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1939
- W. S. Farish & Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1938
- McKinney v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1935
- Freshman v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1935
- F. J. Young Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Commissioner v. South Texas Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Frederick Smith Enter. Co. v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1948
- KIMBRELL'S HOME FURNISH. v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
- South Texas Lumber Co. v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1947
- South Texas Lumber Co. v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1947