Kimbell-Diamond Milling Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner's property was partially destroyed by fire. The insurance proceeds received in settlement were expended, together with other funds, to acquire control of another corporation owning property similar to that destroyed. Thereafter the subsidiary corporation was liquidated by petitioner. Held, the gain incident to the involuntary conversion is not taxable by virtue of section 112 (f) of the Internal Revenue Code.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Artjndell, Judge:
The primary question for our decision is whether the respondent erred in determining that the involuntary conversion of petitioner’s property did not occur within the provisions of section 112 (f) of the Internal Revenue Code.1
The facts are not in dispute. Petitioner owned and operated a milling plant at Wolfe City, Texas. In August 1942 this plant was partially destroyed by fire. Insurance in the sum of $118,200.16 was received in settlement of the destroyed assets on November 14, 1942, and this sum was promptly deposited in a special account in the Fort Worth…
2Cited by30 opinions
- Kimbell-Diamond Milling Co. v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Estate of Goodall v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1968
- Massillon-Cleveland-Akron Sign Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1950
- Loco Realty Company v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1962
- Potter v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1965
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.