Axton v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. Where two different kinds of stock are received in exchange for a third kind of stock, and it appears that there is no satisfactory basis of comparison of the values of the two types of new shares received, no allocation of the old basis need be made. 2. Book value, in this particular case, is an unsatisfactory basis of comparison, and does not afford a satisfactory means of dividing the old basis between the two types of new shares.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Murdock:
The Commissioner determined deficiencies in the petitioners’ income taxes for the year 1928 as follows:
[[Image here]]
The proceedings were consolidated. A single common issue is involved. That issue relates to the amount of profit realized by the *614petitioners in 1928 at the time they received shares of class A and class B stock of a new corporation in exchange for their shares of stock in an old corporation and immediately sold the class A shares for cash. The parties have entered into a stipulation of facts. The only other evidence in the record is the testimony of witnesses…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Fisher v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
- Axton v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1935
- Baker v. Commissioner (A)United States Board of Tax Appeals · 1938
- Barber Sec. Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1941
- Green v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1935