Carey v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. ALLOCATION OF COST - FAILURE OF PROOF TO OVERCOME RESPONDENT'S DETERMINATION. - During 1926 the Boxboard Products Co., of which petitioner Carey was a preferred and common stockholder, redeemed all of its preferred stock. Respondent, in determining the gain on the redemption, made an allocation of costs in accordance with his regulations, which is prima facie correct. Petitioner introduced no evidence to show that respondent's allocation of cost was incorrect.
Read the full summary
1. ALLOCATION OF COST - FAILURE OF PROOF TO OVERCOME RESPONDENT'S DETERMINATION. - During 1926 the Boxboard Products Co., of which petitioner Carey was a preferred and common stockholder, redeemed all of its preferred stock. Respondent, in determining the gain on the redemption, made an allocation of costs in accordance with his regulations, which is prima facie correct. Petitioner introduced no evidence to show that respondent's allocation of cost was incorrect. Respondent sustained. 2. DIVIDENDS - MOST RECENTLY ACCUMULATED EARNINGS OR PROFITS DETERMINED WHERE ENTIRE ISSUE OF DECLARING…
1Opinion of the Court
*577OPINION.
Black:
We will dispose of the issues in the order of their statement. The first issue is as to the amount of taxable gain received by petitioner Carey on the redemption in 1926 of preferred stock which he owned in Boxboard. Respondent made the allocation of costs in accordance with his regulations, approved in Glenn H. Curtiss, 21 B.T.A. 629; aff'd., 57 Fed. (2d) 847. Petitioner introduced no evidence to show that respondent’s allocation of cost between the two classes of stock was incorrect. There being no evidence to overturn respondent’s allocation of cost, it remains unchanged.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Crocker v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Baker v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- James v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928
- Stewart v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
3Cited by1 opinion
- Carey v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934