West End Furniture Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner computed its normal tax net income on the installment basis. It computed its excess profits tax income on the accrual basis, pursuant to section 736 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Read the full summary
Petitioner computed its normal tax net income on the installment basis. It computed its excess profits tax income on the accrual basis, pursuant to section 736 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code. Held, that the credit to which petitioner is entitled by section 26 (e) for "income subject to excess profits tax" must be computed on its accrual basis net income, rather than its installment basis net income; held, further, that the credit provided by section 26 (e) is the amount equal to its adjusted excess profits net income, and not, under facts of this case, the amount of the excess profits tax…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Kern, Judge:
The issue before us is whether petitioner, in computing its normal and surtax net income, is entitled to a credit under section 26 (e) of the Internal Revenue Code, and, if so, in what amount.
That section relates to credits allowed in the computation of corporate normal tax net income and surtax net income, and reads as follows:
SEC. 2 6. CREDITS OF CORPORATIONS.
In the case of a corporation the following credits shall be allowed to the extent provided in the various sections imposing tax * * *.
*******(e) Income Subject to Excess-Pbofits Tax. — In the case of any corporation…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Basalt Rock Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Leo Kahn Furniture Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Houston Textile Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Mutual Shoe Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955
- Mutual Shoe Company v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1956
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.