Legal Opinion

Riddell v. Monolith Portland Cement Co.

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 25, 1963No. 528PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Per curiam

The taxpayer respondent during the taxable year 1952 mined limestone from its own quarry, crushed it, transported the crushed product two miles to its plant, and there, through the addition of other materials and further processing, manufactured the limestone into cement which it sold. It paid taxes for the year mentioned, based on a depletion allowance computed in accordance with Treas ury Regulations. Thereafter taxpayer filed claim for refund and now prosecutes this suit on the ground that the depletion allowance should not have been based upon constructive income at the crushed limestone…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. Cannelton Sewer Pipe Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. R. A. Riddell, District Director of Internal Revenue, Los Angeles District v. Monolith Portland Cement Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. United States v. Henderson Clay ProductsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
  2. North Carolina Granite Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1964
  3. Hugoton Production Company v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
  4. Hugoton Production Company v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1965
  5. United States v. California Portland Cement Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1969

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

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

Powered by the Exa API