Legal Opinion
Routzahn v. Willard Storage Battery Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided May 9, 1933No. 6181PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SIMONS, Circuit Judge.
The suit below was for the recovery of manufacturers’ excise tax paid on the manufacture and sale of electric storage batteries, and collected under the provisions of sections 900 (3) of the Revenue Act of 1921 (42 Stat. 291), and 600 (3) of the Revenue Act of 1924 (26 USCA § 881 note). The taxpayer obtained judgment, and the collector appeals.
Two questions are presented: (1) Are the taxpayer’s storage batteries “parts and accessories” of automotive vehicles within the meaning of the applicable statutes and the regulations of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue? (2)…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- United States v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Metcalf & Eddy v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Wickwire v. ReineckeSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Universal Battery Co. v. United States and Four Other CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Howard v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1942
- Fisher v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1939
- United States Light & Heat Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1933
- Universal Battery Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1933
- Englert Mfg. Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1933
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.