Cortland Specialty Co. v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. A transaction whereby one corporation "agrees to sell, transfer and convey * * *" certain fixed tangible assets for a sum certain, payable in cash and promissory notes, is a sale and not a reorganization within the meaning of section 203(h)(1)(A) of the Revenue Act of 1926. 2. Where a vendor receives more than one-half of the purchase price of certain property during a taxable period, the income realized from such a sale can not be reported on the installment basis.
1Opinion of the Court
*813OPINION.
Morris:
The first question to be determined is whether the transaction between the Cortland Specialty Company, the stock of which the other petitioners herein owned, and the Deyo Oil Company, Inc., was a reorganization within the meaning of section 203 (h) (1) of the Revenue Act of 1926, or whether it constituted nothing more than a sale of corporate assets at a taxable profit. That section provides that:(h) As used in this section and sections 201 and 204—(1) The term “reorganization" means (A) a merger or consolidation (including the acquisition by one corporation of at least a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Vicksburg & Yazoo City Telephone Co. v. Citizens' Telephone Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1901
- Symmes v. Union Trust Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1894
- Lee v. Atlantic Coast Line R.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of South Carolina · 1906
3Cited by17 opinions
- Superior Coach of Florida, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1983
- Caldwell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940
- Golden Nugget, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1984
- Muchnic v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Estate of McWhorter v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1978
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.