Legal Opinion

Perfection Gear Co. v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided June 16, 1930No. H-467PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LITTLETON, Judge.

Plaintiff contends that the Formica timing gears manufactured and sold by it, upon the sale of which the tax in question was collected, were not parts for automobiles. These gears were especially designed and primarily adapted, and were widely advertised and sold, for use on almost every known make of engine for automobiles and trucks. They were therefore properly classed as automobile parts, and the sale therefore was subject to tax. Universal Battery Co. v. United States, 50 S. Ct. 422, 423, 74 L. Ed. —, decided by the Supreme Court May 26, 1930.

It is contended by plaintiff…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Universal Battery Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1930

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Eaton v. American Chain Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
  2. Electric Storage Battery Co. v. McCaughnDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1931
  3. Dalton & Balch, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API