Wright v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Under the facts and circumstances of this case the dividends received by the petitioner in the years 1919 and 1920 constitute stock dividends and are not taxable within the meaning of the taxing statute.
1Opinion of the Court
*819OPINION.
MoRRis:
The first allegation of error urged by the petitioner is that the respondent erred in adding to the net income of the petitioner for the years in controversy certain amounts representing alleged cash dividends. The petitioner contends that the dividends received by him were stock and not cash and therefore did not constitute income within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment of the Constitution as defined by the United States Supreme Court in Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U. S. 189. Cf. United States v. Mellon, 279 Fed. 910, affd. 281 Fed. 645, and United States v. Davison, 1 Fed.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Eisner v. MacOmberSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- United States v. PhellisSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Weiss v. StearnSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Southern Pacific Co. v. LoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. LewellynSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Wood v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Brading v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1929
- Wright v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928