NATIONAL LEAD CO.
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court held that the War Production Board was empowered to issue certificates covering only a part of the cost of petitioner's improvements.
Petitioner expanded its plant during WWII and received partial necessity certificates from the War Production Board. Petitioner claimed a tax refund b…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Accelerated Amortization cases and more on FLexlaw
Mr. Justice Black delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a companion case to No. 78, United States v. Allen-Bradley Co., ante, p. 306, which was also decided today. During World War II petitioner manufactured engine bearings. In 1944 petitioner expanded its plant in an effort to increase the output of these essential war products. At the same time it applied to the War Production Board for certification that the various additions were necessary in the interest of national defense. However the Board, as in Allen-Bradley, granted certificates of necessity for only a part of the cost of petitioner’s new facilities. In its income tax return for 1944 petitioner exercised the privilege such certification conferred by taking as a deduction a sum based on the accelerated amortization of that part of the costs which had been certified by the Board.
In 1951 the Commissioner of Internal Revenue asserted a deficiency against petitioner on grounds unrelated to the present controversy. Petitioner subsequently filed a petition for redetermination with the Tax Court claiming that it was entitled to a refund for overpayment of income taxes in 1944. The amount of this overpayment was calculated on the basis that petitioner was entitled to accelerate the amortization of the full cost of those facilities covered by the Board’s “partial certifications.” Petitioner contends that the Board was not authorized to certify only a part of the cost of a facility when the Board had determined that the facility as a whole was necessary to the national defense. The Tax Court granted petitioner’s claim, but on appeal the Second Circuit reversed, holding that petitioner had forfeited its right to challenge the Board’s action by waiting too long after accepting the tax benefits of the “partial certificates” to attack their validity. 230 F. 2d 161. The Court of Appeals did not reach the question whether the Board was authorized to issue such “partial certificates.” For reasons stated in our opinion in No. 78, United States v. Allen-Bradley Co., supra, we hold that the Board was empowered to issue certificates covering only a part of the cost of petitioner’s improvements. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.
Affirmed.
Mr. Justice Harlan joins in the Court’s decision for the reasons stated in his concurring opinion in United States v. Allen-Bradley Co., ante, p. 311.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United States v. Ohio Power Co., 353 U.S. 98 (U.S. 1957)…. 919), denying the timely petition for rehearing in this case (351 U. S. 980), so that this case might be disposed of consistently with the companion cases of United States v. Allen-Bradley Co., 352 U. S. 306, and National Lead Co. v. Commissioner, 352 U. S. 313, in which we had granted certio-rari the same day, viz. June 11, 1956. 351 U. S. 981. If there is to be uniformity in the application of the principles announced in those two companion cases, the judgment below in the instant case cannot stand. Acco…
-
United States v. Matheson, 532 F.2d 809 (2d Cir. 1976)…d to take an inconsistent stand to the detriment of the Government, which has appropriately imposed the tax in reliance upon the decedent’s act.” See also Commissioner v. National Lead Co., 230 F. 2d 161 (2d Cir. 1956), aff’d without reaching issue, 352 U.S. 313, 77 S.Ct. 347, 1 L.Ed.2d 352 (1957) (taxpayer who received a tax benefit from the War Production Board thereby forfeits his right to later challenge the authority of the same Board with respect to a different transaction). Appellant contends that s…
-
American-Foreign S.S. Corp. v. United States, 265 F.2d 136 (2d Cir. 1958)…2d 373, and that, in any event, since the libelants accepted the ships on the Commission’s terms, they are now es-topped from disputing them, citing Commissioner of Internal Rev. v. National Lead Co., 2 Cir., 230 F. 2d 161, affirmed on other grounds 352 U.S. 313, 77 S.Ct. 347, 1 L.Ed.2d 352. This point was unmistakably presented and was disposed of without discussion by another panel of this court in Sword Line in an opinion which did not explain why the court lacked jurisdiction of the claim for recovery…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Commissioner OF Internal Revenue v. Nat'l Lead Co., 230 F.2d 161 (2d Cir. 1956)