Legal Opinion

American Potash Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided November 5, 1934No. 41950PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LITTLETON, Judge.

Counsel for the defendant contends that plaintiff is not entitled to recover either of the amounts hereinbefore mentioned as additional interest on the 1917 tax overpayment of $61,561.96 under either the interest provisions of the Revenue Act, as computed by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, or under *719the Act of March 3, 1875, on the amount of $105,432.87, being the tax overpayment plus interest thereon duly allowed by the Commissioner. In support of this position counsel for defendant argues that the provisions of the 1928 Revenue Act wholly control the matter; that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Whitbeck v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1933
  2. Helvetia Milk Condensing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1932
  3. Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1933
  4. Lloyd-Smith v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1930
  5. Briggs & Turivas, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1931

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. United States v. N. Y. Rayon Importing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. American Steam Conveyor Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1935
  3. Sancho v. SerrallesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1939
  4. Bianchi v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2000
  5. Richardson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API