Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Cameron v. Commissioner

United States Board of Tax Appeals

Decided July 22, 1930No. Docket Nos. 25899-25901PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION.

MoRRis:

Upon motion of counsel these proceedings, involving deficiencies determined against individual partners for the calendar year 1922, were consolidated for hearing and decision. One issue is common to each proceeding, namely, whether “ respondent failed in computing the net income of the partnership of A. J. Cameron & Co. to allow as a deduction a reasonable allowance for exhaustion, wear and tear, including a reasonable allowance for obsolescence on the buildings and machinery, etc., used in said business in the taxable year.” Docket No. 25900 presents the following additional…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. FlannerySupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. Heiner v. TindleSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  3. McCaughn v. LudingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  4. United States v. CoulbyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1919
  5. United States v. CoulbyDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1918

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. W. M. Ritter Lumber Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
  2. Firemen's Ins. Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
  3. Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
  4. A. H. Morse Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1953
  5. Fritz v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API