Legal Opinion · Dissent

Creme Manufacturing Co., Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellant-Cross

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided June 25, 1974No. 73-1609Published

1DissentGee, Circuit Judge

I respectfully dissent from the Court’s holding that taxpayer’s excise tax should be calculated upon a constructive price set by the Internal Revenue Service. Section 4216 of the IRC does not authorize this, even where the transaction is not at arm’s length, unless the “. article is . sold ... at less than the fair market price.” The court below found as a fact that “. . . the price charged by Creme Manufacturing was a fair market price charged in a similar fashion as that charged by others in the ordinary course of trade.”1

Record evidence, some of which is mentioned in the majority opinion,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bourjois, Inc. v. McGowanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1936
  2. Creme Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API