Legal Opinion

Acme Breweries v. Commissioner

United States Tax Court

Decided November 24, 1950No. Docket No. 11156PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SUPPLEMENTAL opinion.

Tietjens, Judge:

The necessity for a supplemental opinion results from petitioner’s disagreement with respondent’s revised computation submitted herein under Rule 50.

In making his computation, respondent interpreted the Court’s opinion as denying petitioner any relief under section 722, except that stipulated by the parties with reference to petitioner’s yeast business. Accordingly, the Commissioner simply adjusted petitioner’s excess profits net income for the period in question to reflect the stipulated increase in normal earnings of the yeast business and thus found an…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Homer Laughlin China Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1946
  2. Stimson Mill Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1946
  3. Dowd-Feder, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Dayton Rubber Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1956
  2. United States Rubber Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1958
  3. Acme Breweries v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
  4. Dayton Rubber Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1956
  5. H. Fendrich, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955

4 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