Legal Opinion

Duquesne Light Holdings Inc v. Commissioner of Internal Reven

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided June 29, 2017No. 14-1743PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

AMBRO, Circuit Judge

This appeal concerns the continued vitality of the so-called Ilfeld doctrine for interpreting the Internal Revenue Code. Taken from Charles Ilfeld Co. v. Hernandez, 292 U.S. 62, 54 S.Ct. 596, 78 L.Ed. 1127 (1934), this doctrine teaches that “the Code should not be interpreted to allow [the taxpayer] ‘the practical equivalent of a double deduction’ ... absent a clear decía-, ration of intent by Congress.” United States v. Skelly Oil Co., 394 U.S. 678, 684, 89 S.Ct. 1379, 22 L.Ed.2d 642 (1969) (quoting Ilfeld, 292 U.S. at 68, 54 S.Ct. 596). Duquesne Light…

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Welch v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
  3. Indopco, Inc. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Security Flour Mills Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  5. United States v. LudeySupreme Court of the United States · 1927

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. United States v. JerebCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2018
  2. SIH Partners LLLP Explorer Par v. Commissioner of Internal RevenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019
  3. H.D. v. KENNETT CONSOLIDATED SCHOOL DISTRICTDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2019
  4. HERRON v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, UNITED STATES OF AMERICADistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
  5. Peter Polanco v. Commissioner of Internal RevenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017

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

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

Powered by the Exa API