Hemenway-Johnson Furniture Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, petitioner has not reconstructed a fair and just amount representing normal earnings because it took into consideration events and conditions occuring after December 31, 1939, consideration of which for such purpose being prohibited under section 722 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Withey, Judge:
It is conceded that the petitioner’s acquisition of certain of the assets, plus the store location of Johnson, and the opening of three branch stores during the base period years, represents changes in capacity for operation within the import of section 722(b) (4) of the Internal Revenue Code.1 It is unnecessary for us to consider the section 722 (b) (2) factor alleged by petitioner as a ground for relief because of our ultimate grounds for decision herein. Under the provisions of section 722 (a) the taxpayer must go further than merely establishing the existence of a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wisconsin Farmer Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Danco Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Godfrey Food Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1952
- Singer Bros., Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hemenway-Johnson Furniture Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953
- Hemenway-Johnson Furniture Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1954