Legal Opinion

Alameda Park Co. v. Commissioner

United States Board of Tax Appeals

Decided March 11, 1932No. Docket No. 8355Published

The deficiency herein for the year 1917 is barred by the statute of limitations.

1Opinion of the Court

ALAMEDA PARK COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.

Alameda Park Co. v. Commissioner

Docket No. 8355.

United States Board of Tax Appeals

25 B.T.A. 850; 1932 BTA LEXIS 1466;

March 11, 1932, Promulgated

The deficiency herein for the year 1917 is barred by the statute of limitations.

George E. H. Goodner, Esq., for the petitioner.

W. Frank Gibbs, Esq., for the respondent.

LOVE

This proceeding, which involves a deficiency for the calendar year 1917, was previously before the Board on its merits, a report of which is published at 10 B.T.A. 1115. Later the Court of Appeals of…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Bowers v. New York & Albany Lighterage Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. Russell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  3. Aiken v. BurnetSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  4. Farmers Feed Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928
  5. Bonwit Teller & Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928

9 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