Salzman v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Income -- Deduction -- O. P. A. Overcharge -- Public Policy -- Ordinary and Necessary Expense -- Sec. 23 (a) (1) (A), I. R. C. -- A partnership which deliberately, knowingly, and wilfully violated an O. P. A. regulation and continued until stopped by the O. P. A., may not deduct under section 23 (a) (1) (A) the amount of the resulting overcharges which it was forced by suit to pay into the Treasury of the United States.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Murdock, Judge:
The partnership violated MPR 287 as it was in effect in 1943 and 1944 by using the increased portion of the wages it paid in calculating its direct labor costs for the purpose of computing its maximum prices. It thereby overcharged for its products because the prices charged were then in excess of those permitted by O. P. A. on the costs of the petitioner recognized by O. P. A. in computing maximum prices. It was sued by O. P. A. and required to pay the overcharges into the Treasury of the United States in its taxable year ending in 1946. The petitioners, the two equal…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Jerry Rossman Corporation v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- Henry Watterson Hotel Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- National Brass Works, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1953
- National Brass Works, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1951
3Cited by10 opinions
- Boyle, Flagg & Seaman, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955
- Wm. T. Stover Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1956
- Lentin v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1954
- Mesi v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955
- Boyle, Flagg & Seaman, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.