Block One Thirty-Nine, Inc. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner claimed relief for excess profits taxes under section 722 (c) (3) because its invested capital was abnormally low for each of the taxable years. Held, that where its proposed credit under the income method is smaller than the credits actually allowed under the invested capital method, it is not entitled to relief.
1Opinion of the Court
Block One Thirty-Nine, Inc., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Block One Thirty-Nine, Inc. v. Commissioner
Docket Nos. 10925, 26636, 26637
United States Tax Court
17 T.C. 1364; 1952 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 269;
February 21, 1952, Promulgated
Decisions will be entered under Rule 50.
Petitioner claimed relief for excess profits taxes under section 722 (c) (3) because its invested capital was abnormally low for each of the taxable years. Held, that where its proposed credit under the income method is smaller than the credits actually allowed under the invested capital method, it is…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Lamar Creamery Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Monarch Cap Screw & Mfg. Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1945
- Blum Folding Paper Box Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1945
- Danco Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Irwin B. Schwabe Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1949
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.