Springfield Plywood Corp. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner acquired timberlands and within 6 months thereafter entered into a contract contemplating the disposal of all timber, within certain categories, to be paid for as cut. The contract referred to petitioner as vendor and the other parties as vendees and provided for the cutting of all such timber within 2 years, to be paid for at the end of that time whether cut or not.
Read the full summary
Petitioner acquired timberlands and within 6 months thereafter entered into a contract contemplating the disposal of all timber, within certain categories, to be paid for as cut. The contract referred to petitioner as vendor and the other parties as vendees and provided for the cutting of all such timber within 2 years, to be paid for at the end of that time whether cut or not. Held, that by and at the time of the contract there was "disposal" of the timber within 6 months from acquisition thereof within the language of section 117 (j) (1) and (k) ( 2), Internal Revenue Code, and that…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Disney, Judge:
This case is submitted to us under Rule 30. As filed, it involved the following deficiencies:
[[Image here]]
The parties have, however, by stipulation settled and eliminated all issues as to 1942, leaving the only issue before us as follows: Whether petitioner, which had acquired timberlands and within 6 months contracted for the removal of timber therefrom on a royalty basis, received ordinary income or, on the other hand, capital gain, in royalties paid for timber cut more than G months from the date of petitioner’s acquisition of the timber property, and this, in turn,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Phelps v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- United States v. GratiotSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Rider v. CooneyMontana Supreme Court · 1933
- Midland County v. SlaughterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1910
- Hill v. SumnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Union Bag-Camp Paper Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
- Harold Barclay and Dorothy Barclay v. The United States. Philip Dahl and Dorothy Dahl v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
- Ah Pah Redwood Company, a Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
- Barclay v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
- Lawton v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1959
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.