Atlas Supply Co. v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
For the purposes of the credit provided by section 26(c)(1) of the Revenue Act of 1936, a corporate bylaw, as such, is not a "written contract executed by the corporation." Davision-Joseph Campau Realty Co.,41 B.T.A. 675, followed.
1Opinion of the Court
*325OPINION.
Leech:
Petitioner contends that it is entitled to the credit under section 26 (c) (1) of the Revenue Act of 1936 because its duly executed bylaw prevents it from declaring dividends if its capital would thereby be impaired.
In Davison-Joseph Campau Realty Co., 41 B. T. A. 675, the Board held that a bylaw does not constitute “a written contract executed by the corporation” within the meaning of the statutory provision. The rationale of that opinion appears from the following quotation therefrom:
The shareholders may thus be bound in their relations with the corporation and with each other…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Crane-Johnson Co. v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Johnson v. State Mutual Rodded Fire InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
3Cited by4 opinions
- Supplee-Biddle Hardware Co. v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
- Atlas Supply Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1941
- Bishop & B. Mfg. Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1941
- McLean County Service Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1941