Legal Opinion
Consolidated Utilities Co. v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided July 2, 1936No. 8073PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOLMES, Circuit Judge.
This appeal involves a deficiency in income tax for the year 1928. It was taken from the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals by petition for review filed pursuant to the provisions of sections 1001-1003 of the Revenue Act of 1926, c. 27, 44 Stat. 9, as amended by section 603 of Revenue Act 1928, 45 Stat. 873, section 1101 of the Revenue Act of 1932, c. 209, 47 Stat. 169, and section 519 of the Revenue Act of 1934, c. 277, 48 Stat. 680, 760 (26 U.S.C.A. §§ 641 (a, b), (c), (1-3), 642, 644, 645). There is no evidence incorporated in the record, but the facts are taken…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Brushaber v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Nichols v. CoolidgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Blodgett v. HoldenSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Irwin v. GavitSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- LaBelle Iron Works v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Rose v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- Sid Luckman and Estelle Luckman v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
- James P. Neill v. Robert L. Phinney, District Director of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1957
- Claridge Apartments Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1943
- Rose v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970