Duke Power Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
1. Sec. 722(b)(4) -- Pushback -- Cabpni. -- In determining CABPNI for a power company which built new plants and came under sec. 722(b)(4) all earnings due to the increased capacity and all related changes must be considered. Amount of CABPNI determined. 2. Sec. 711(b)(1)(J). -- Abnormal deductions. Jefferson Amusement Co., 18 T.C. 44, followed.
1Opinion of the Court
Duke Power Company, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Duke Power Co. v. Commissioner
Docket No. 45862
United States Tax Court
49 T.C. 14; 1967 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 26;
October 24, 1967, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 50.
1. Sec. 722(b)(4) -- Pushback -- Cabpni. -- In determining CABPNI for a power company which built new plants and came under sec. 722(b)(4) all earnings due to the increased capacity and all related changes must be considered. Amount of CABPNI determined.
2. Sec. 711(b)(1)(J). -- Abnormal deductions. Jefferson Amusement Co., 18 T.C. 44, followed.
J.…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cohan v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
- National Grinding Wheel Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Jefferson Amusement Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1952
- Superior Valve & Fittings Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1952
- Davenport Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1957
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.