American Code Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtSwan, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1,2] The correctness of the action of tho Commissioner depends upon the construction of the Revenue Act of 1918. Section 234 (a) of that act (40 Stat. 1077) permits a corporation to deduct from its gross income:
“(1) All the ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on ‘ any trade or business. * * *
“(4) Losses sustained during the taxable year and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise. * * * ”
Tho act also permits taxpayers to file returns on tho accrual basis if their books are so kept. Section 232 (40…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Lewellyn v. Electric Reduction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Pierce v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Parker v. RussellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hallmark Cards, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1988
- Estate of Scofield v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1959
- Estate of Levi T. Scofield, Douglas F. Schofield, Trustee, Mary Jane Scofield Demmon (Nee Mary Jane Scofield), Roy C. Demmon and Mary Scofield Demmon, Josephine Scholfield Thompson, Edward W. Thompson and Josephine S. Thompson, Douglas F. Schofield Trust, Douglas F. Schofield, Trustee, Douglas F. Schofield and Mary D. Schofile, Field, Schofield Building Land Trust, Douglas F. Schofield, Trustee v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate of Levi T. Scofield, Douglas F. Schofield, TrusteeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1959
- Central Trust Co. v. BurnetCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1930
- Lehigh & Hudson River Ry. Co. v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.