Legal Opinion

Armstrong v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board

United States Tax Court

Decided November 15, 1950No. Docket Nos. 446-R, 755-RPublished

Petitioner, a manufacturers' representative, during 1943 and 1944 earned commissions based upon orders largely from commercial firms to which he had been selling for his principals for many years. The products sold by him for his principals had in large measure a war end use by the vendees in contracting with the Government.

Read the full summary

Petitioner, a manufacturers' representative, during 1943 and 1944 earned commissions based upon orders largely from commercial firms to which he had been selling for his principals for many years. The products sold by him for his principals had in large measure a war end use by the vendees in contracting with the Government. Held, that to the extent of such war end use of products sold, the petitioner was a subcontractor within section 403 (a) (5) (B) of the Renegotiation Act of 1943. Amount of excessive profits determined. Held, further, that the fact that petitioner declined to file the…

1Opinion of the Court

James B. Armstrong, Petitioner, v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board, Respondent

Armstrong v. War Contracts Price Adjustment Board

Docket Nos. 446-R, 755-R

United States Tax Court

15 T.C. 625; 1950 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 48;

November 15, 1950, Promulgated

Petitioner, a manufacturers' representative, during 1943 and 1944 earned commissions based upon orders largely from commercial firms to which he had been selling for his principals for many years. The products sold by him for his principals had in large measure a war end use by the vendees in contracting with the Government. Held, that to the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Armstrong v. War Contracts Price Adjustment BoardUnited States Tax Court · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API