Legal Opinion
Gimbel Bros. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided May 12, 1976No. 491-71PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKashxwa, Judge
This action comes before us on a stipulation of facts. The essential facts stipulated are recited below. This action arises *19under the Internal Revenue Codes of 1939 and 1954 for the taxable years ended January 31, 1952, through January 31, 1966, inclusive.
We hold for the plaintiff for reasons hereafter stated.
Plaintiff is engaged in the business of selling merchandise through department stores. It qualified as a “dealer in personal property” within the meaning of the installment sale provisions of the Internal Revenue Codes of 1939 and 1954. In its return for 1952 plaintiff elected to use the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Commissioner v. South Texas Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Pacific National Co. v. WelchSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Leon Rosenfield, as Administrator, D.B.N.C.T.A. Of Estate of George D. Beaston, Deceased v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1958
- Rosenfield v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1957
- Consolidated Dry Goods Company v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1960
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Diebold, Incorporated v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Diebold, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1989
- Pacific Enters. & Subsidiaries v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1993
- Huffman v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2006
- Capital One Fin. Corp. v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2008
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.