Legal Opinion

C. H. Mead Coal Co. v. Commissioner

United States Board of Tax Appeals

Decided June 30, 1933No. Docket Nos. 42718, 42719, 54660PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*606OPINION.

Matthews :

1. The issue with respect to depreciation falls under two heads — (a) the basis to be used, and (b) the rate to be used in determining the depreciation allowable on steel rails.(a) The petitioner recognizes that cost is the basis to be used in determining depreciation and contends that $335,000 was the cost to it of the depreciable property acquired upon its organization in 1920. Eespondent contends, on the other hand, that the petitioner paid only $235,000 for the property and has calculated depreciation on this basis.

The facts, simply stated, are these:

C. H. and C. S. Mead…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Burnet v. HoustonSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Pinellas Ice & Cold Storage Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. Minnesota Tea Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
  4. Thomas v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1929

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. J. S. Rippel & Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
  2. C. H. Mead Coal Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
  3. Eaton v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API