Marcalus Mfg. Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
1. Petitioner received $ 125,000 from its insurer as a compromise settlement under a policy affording "direct damage" and "use and occupancy" coverages. Respondent's allocations of $ 25,000 and $ 100,000, respectively, are upheld on failure of proof of some more reasonable allocation. 2. Held, on the facts, that the "direct damage" payment of $ 25,000 did not result in gain to petitioner.
1Opinion of the Court
Forrester, Judge:
These consolidated proceedings involve deficiencies in income tax of the petitioners for the years and in the amounts as follows:
MARCALUS MANUFACTURING CO., INC.
Taxable year ended Deficiency
April 30,1952_ $6,271.23
April 30, 1953_ 63, 955.13
Marcal Pulp & Paper, Inc.
■July 31,1952_$53,461.99
July 31,1953_ 55,900.00
Petitioner Marcalus Manufacturing Co., Inc., will hereinafter be referred to as “Marcalus.” Petitioner Marcal Pulp & Paper, Inc., will hereinafter be referred to as “Marcal.”
All issues concerning Marcalus have been conceded, consequently, it will suffice for us to enter…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Massillon-Cleveland-Akron Sign Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Fidelity-Phenix Fire Ins. Co. of New York v. Benedict Coal Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1933
- Miller v. Hocking Glass Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1935
3Cited by9 opinions
- Newberry v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1981
- Maryland Shipbuilding and Drydock Company v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969
- McCabe v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- Shakertown Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1960
- Marcal Pulp & Paper, Inc. v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.