Sanford Cotton Mills v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. Rate of depreciation on buildings and machinery used in a manufacturing business determined. 2. Under the facts, held that the petitioner is not entitled to assessment under section 328 of the Revenue Act of 1918.
1Opinion of the Court
*1212OPINION.
Teauoiell :
On the question of the payment on account of exhaustion, wear and tear of the machinery and buildings there is no con*1213troversy over any factor except the rate of depreciation. This is a question of fact and we have arrived at our findings of fact from all the testimony in the case.
On the question of the expenditures which the petitioner contends were for repairs, it is also a question of fact as to whether they were in fact repairs or whether they were for replacements, additions or improvements. On this question the testimony is convincing that what "was done was in the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Robley H. Evans and Julia M. Evans v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959
- Polyak v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1990
- Hertz Corporation v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1958
- Hertz Corporation, a Corporation (Successor by Merger to J. Frank Connor, Inc., a Corporation) v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
- Jaffa v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1961
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.