Clear Fork Coal Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner opened its Mine No. 4 in 1944, and its projected plans were to extract coal by the "room and pillar" method of mining.
Read the full summary
Petitioner opened its Mine No. 4 in 1944, and its projected plans were to extract coal by the "room and pillar" method of mining. Sometime in 1945, it had started driving a cross-entryway, from which it was turning rooms and mining coal, but its early experience demonstrated that, due to ceiling conditions, rooms could not be turned and mined as the driving of the entryway progressed, but that the entryway would have to be driven to a determined point and the rooms then turned and mined as the operation retreated to the mouth of the entryway, and upon the completion of such room mining, the…
1Opinion of the Court
Clear Fork Coal Company, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Clear Fork Coal Co. v. Commissioner
Docket No. 37157
United States Tax Court
22 T.C. 1075; 1954 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 121;
August 23, 1954, Filed August 23, 1954, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 50.
Petitioner opened its Mine No. 4 in 1944, and its projected plans were to extract coal by the "room and pillar" method of mining. Sometime in 1945, it had started driving a cross-entryway, from which it was turning rooms and mining coal, but its early experience demonstrated that, due to ceiling conditions, rooms…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Guanacevi Mining Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1942
- Blockton Cahaba Coal Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1928
- Alsted Coal Co. v. YokeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1952
- Clear Fork Coal Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1954