26 U.S.C. § 124
Repealed. Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, § 11801(a)(9), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–520]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1948–1959 · leading case: United States v. Allen-Bradley Co., 352 U.S. 306 (1957).
United States v. Allen-Bradley Co., 352 U.S. 306 (1957). “"As used in this section, the term `emergency facility' means any facility, land, building, machinery, or equipment, or part thereof, the construction, reconstruction, erection, installation, or acquisition of which was completed after December 31, 1939, and with respect to…”
Butzman v. United States. Craig v. United States, 205 F.2d 343 (6th Cir. 1953). “On October 8, 1940, § 124, Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. § 124 , was enacted as part of the defense mobilization program.”
Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Nat'l Lead Co., 230 F.2d 161 (2d Cir. 1956). “This is a petition by the Commissioner for review of a decision by the Tax Court that the taxpayer was entitled to accelerated amortization under § 124 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, as amended, 26 U.S.C.A. § 124 , of the entire cost of certain “emergency facilities”…”
United States v. Wissahickon Tool Works, Inc., 84 F. Supp. 896 (S.D.N.Y. 1949). “The only items specifically excluded from the computation of cost are (1) a recomputation of the amortization deduction pursuant to Section 124 (d) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 124 (d), until after such recomputation has been made as provided in the statute and…”
Hardt v. Heller Bros., 171 F.2d 644 (3rd Cir. 1948). “, and amendments thereto, 26 U.S.C.A. § 124 , known as “The Tax Amortization Law.”
United States v. Wissahickon Tool Works, Inc., 200 F.2d 936 (2d Cir. 1952). “Code § 124(d), 26 U.S.C. § 124 (d). No recomputation of defendants’ amortization deduction has yet been made.”
Ken-Rad Tube & Lamp Corp. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue. Ken-Rad Transmitting Tube Corp. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 180 F.2d 940 (6th Cir. 1950). “Petitioner taxpayer was entitled to amortize the “basis” of such emergency facilities over a period of sixty months for federal income tax purposes under Section 124(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 124 (a). *941 In addition, subsection (d) (1) of Section 124 of…”
United States Graphite Co. v. Sawyer, 176 F.2d 868 (D.C. Cir. 1949). “26 U.S.C.A. § 124 . The pertinent portion of subsection (e) is as follows: “(1) Emergency facility.”
Lake Erie Eng'g Corp. v. McGowan, 162 F. Supp. 176 (W.D.N.Y. 1957). “40 were not certified as emergency facilities because Lake Erie did not apply to the Navy Department for Certificates of Necessity therefor within the time required by the Internal Revenue Code (1939) section 124(f), 26 U.S.C.A. § 124 (f). The contract between Lake Erie and the…”
Stand. Oil Co. v. United States, 175 F. Supp. 670 (N.D. Ohio 1959). “In March, 1946, plaintiff filed, pursuant to 1939 Code Section 124(k), 26 U.S.C.A. § 124 (k), an application for excess profits tax “tentative amortization allowance” for the year 1942.”
United States v. Milnor Corp., 85 F. Supp. 931 (E.D. Pa. 1949). “APPENDIX Internal Revenue Code: 26 U.S.C.A. § 124 . “Sec. 124. (As added by Second Revenue Act of 1940, supra, Sec.”
W. J. Voit Rubber Corp. v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 277 (S.D. Cal. 1953). “The basis of taxpayer’s claim is that it has not been permitted to recover the full cost basis of certain emergency facilities, as allowed under 26 U.S.C.A. § 124 -(a). The taxpayer through this action is-attempting to make a recovery based upon his broken promises.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.