Bessemer Limestone & Cement Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, the reorganization here in question meets the requirement of section 112 (b) (5) of the Revenue Act of 1934 that the stock and securities received by each transferor be substantially in proportion to his interest in the property prior to the exchange.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Van Fossan, Judge:
The question is whether the exchanges effected incident to the 77B reorganization pursuant to which petitioner was revived to take over and continue the business of Delaware, the latter being forthwith dissolved, constituted a tax-free transaction under section 112 (b) (5) of the Revenue Act of 1934,1 as contended by petitioner.
Petitioner was first organized in 1919. It actively engaged in the limestone and cement business until February 1, 1927, on or about which date all of its assets were indirectly transferred to Delaware, which corporation had been formed on…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Case v. Los Angeles Lumber Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Doyle v. Mitchell Brothers Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. BoydSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Consolidated Rock Products Co. v. Du BoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Claridge Apartments Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bessemer Limestone & Cement Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1954