Retsal Drilling Co. v. Commissioner
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
HUTCHESON, Circuit Judge.
This is another of that growing body of cases in which the taxpayer makes claim that moneys expended for drilling and equipping oil wells, are deductible under the intangible drilling and development costs option.1 Expenditures on eighteen wells are involved. Seven of the eighteen were drilled under contracts which provided that the owner would “furnish fuel, water, storage tanks, connections and all other material necessary and incident to the drilling and completing of the wells other than that which the contractor has obligated himself to furnish.” The contractor…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. AmbroseCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1942
- J. K. Hughes Oil Co. v. BassCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1932
- White v. Cascade Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
- Retsal Drilling Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1940
3Cited by14 opinions
- Totah Drilling Company v. AbrahamNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1958
- Little Susitna Construction Co. v. Soil Processing, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1997
- F. H. E. Oil Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1945
- Continental Oil Co. v. JonesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
- Bernuth v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.