Krug v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Under the principles announced in United States v. Updike,281 U.S. 489, in the present case, where no return was made by transferor company for the year 1918 but an assessment against it was made in 1922, the period of limitations respecting the transferee began to run at the date of assessment and bars enforcement of the liability against transferee on a notice of liability issued October 29, 1929.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Van Fossan:
Respondent proposes to assess against and collect from the petitioner the sum of $17,127.60 as his liability as transferee of the property of the Krug Baking Co., a corporation, such amount having been assessed against that company for the year 1918.
The sole issue is whether or not the various statutes of limitation prevent such assessment and collection.
The material facts were stipulated substantially as follows:
The petitioner is an individual, residing in Los Angeles, California. During the year 1918 he was the principal stockholder of the Krug Baking Co. (hereinafter…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lucas v. Pilliod Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
- United States v. UpdikeSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Roche v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1931
- Shaw v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1930
- Ward Bros. Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1931
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bartmer Automatic Self Service Laundry, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1960
- Bartmer Automatic Self Service Laundry, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1960
- Krug v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934