Buck v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board
United States Tax Court
The petitioner has moved for judgment on the pleadings, the claim being that the War Contracts Price Adjustment Board did not conclude renegotiation of his business for the calendar year 1943 within one year after commencement of renegotiation, as required by section 403 (c) (3) of the Renegotiation Act, as amended February 25, 1944, by the Revenue Act of 1943. On December 1, 1943, prior to the creation of the War Contracts Price Adjustment Board and prior to the enactment…
Read the full summary
The petitioner has moved for judgment on the pleadings, the claim being that the War Contracts Price Adjustment Board did not conclude renegotiation of his business for the calendar year 1943 within one year after commencement of renegotiation, as required by section 403 (c) (3) of the Renegotiation Act, as amended February 25, 1944, by the Revenue Act of 1943. On December 1, 1943, prior to the creation of the War Contracts Price Adjustment Board and prior to the enactment of any provision establishing a period within which renegotiation proceedings, once commenced, must be concluded, the…
1Opinion of the Court
Harold F. Buck, Petitioner, v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board, Respondent
Buck v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board
Docket No. 449-R.
United States Tax Court
10 T.C. 623; 1948 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 221;
April 15, 1948, Promulgated
The petitioner has moved for judgment on the pleadings, the claim being that the War Contracts Price Adjustment Board did not conclude renegotiation of his business for the calendar year 1943 within one year after commencement of renegotiation, as required by section 403 (c) (3) of the Renegotiation Act, as amended February 25, 1944, by the Revenue Act of 1943. On…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Buck v. War Contracts Price Adjustment BoardUnited States Tax Court · 1948