Consolidated Goldacres Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner, a Nevada corporation, entered into contracts for erection of mining machinery and plant. Title was retained by the seller until payment, in general dependent upon the amount of ore processed. Held, the contracts did not comprise a "note" or "mortgage" within the intendment of section 719 (a) (1), Internal Revenue Code, as to definition of borrowed invested capital.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Disney, Judge:
Under the facts above set forth, is the petitioner entitled to include $221,476.59 as borrowed invested capital, in computing excess profits, within the intendment of section 719 (a) (1) of the Internal Revenue Code?2 That section, in short, provides for such inclusion if the amount is (1) indebtedness and (2) if it is evidenced by a bond, note, bill of exchange, debenture, certificate of indebtedness, mortgage, or deed of trust. Both elements must appear, that is, indebtedness, and the requisite form therof. If either is lacking, obviously the amount is not borrowed…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Economy Sav. & Loan Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1945
- Journal Publishing Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1944
- Studebaker Bros. Co. of Utah v. WitcherNevada Supreme Court · 1921
- Faisst v. WaldoSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- Southern Pacific Co. v. MillerNevada Supreme Court · 1916
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Consolidated Goldacres Co. v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1947
- Jacob Sincoff, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953
- C. L. Downey Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Hunt Foods, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1951
- Oregon-Washington Plywood Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.