26 U.S.C. § 272
Disposal of coal or domestic iron ore
Where the disposal of coal or iron ore is covered by section 631, no deduction shall be allowed for expenditures attributable to the making and administering of the contract under which such disposition occurs and to the preservation of the economic interest retained under such contract, except that if in any taxable year such expenditures plus the adjusted depletion basis of the coal or iron ore disposed of in such taxable year exceed the amount realized under such contract, such excess, to the extent not availed of as a reduction of gain under section 1231, shall be a loss deductible under section 165(a). This section shall not apply to any taxable year during which there is no income under the contract.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 130
cases, 1935–1970 · leading case: Olsen v. Helvering, 88 F.2d 650 (2d Cir. 1937).
Olsen v. Helvering, 88 F.2d 650 (2d Cir. 1937). “Two questions are at issue: first, whether the notice of deficiency was valid under section 272 (k) of the Revenue Act of 1928 ( 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 and note); and second, if so, whether, as discharged administrator, he was still subject to assessment, and could appeal to the…”
Ventura Consol. Oil Fields v. Rogan, 86 F.2d 149 (9th Cir. 1936). “According to section 274 (d), Revenue Act of 1926 ( 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (d) and note), a taxpayer may waive the restrictions by a signed notice in writing filed with the Commissioner.”
Repetti v. Jamison, 131 F. Supp. 626 (N.D. Cal. 1955). “Plaintiff instituted this action under 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (a) (1) to restrain the assessment of income taxes claimed by defendant to be due to the Government.”
Van Antwerp v. United States, 92 F.2d 871 (9th Cir. 1937). “55 , 75] or section 272(a) of the Revenue Act of 1928 [ 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (a)] on the assessment and collection of any deficiency in tax included in the principal sum of the tax liability as set forth in the said instrument, together with any penalty or interest properly…”
Olds & Whipple, Inc. v. United States, 22 F. Supp. 809 (Ct. Cl. 1938). “55 , and 272 (e) of the Revenue Act of 1928, 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (e) and note, prior to the final hearing by the Board, the Board of Tax Appeals was without authority on November 20, 1935, to find any deficiency for 1927 or 1929 in excess of the amount originally determined and…”
Keeler v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 180 F.2d 707 (10th Cir. 1950). “”' 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (a) (1). The Tax Court then has jurisdiction to determine the correct deficiency even though the amount so determined is greater than that found by the Commissioner.”
Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Ray, 88 F.2d 891 (7th Cir. 1937). “” What construction should be given the words appearing in subsection (e) of section 272 ( 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (e) and note), “if claim therefor is asserted by the Commissioner at or before the hearing or a rehearing”? After the Board made its finding that the $25,000 was income…”
John J. Harvey & Irma P. Harvey v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 283 F.2d 491 (9th Cir. 1960). “Petitioners brought this action in the Tax Court under § 272 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 , to redetermine a deficiency assessed by the Commissioner with respect to petitioner’s income tax for 1953.”
Joseph P. Kiker v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Joseph P. Kiker, Sr. & Elizabeth Kiker, His Wife v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 218 F.2d 389 (4th Cir. 1955). “, 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (f); and (3) whether the petition of Mr.”
Moore v. Cleveland Ry. Co., 108 F.2d 656 (6th Cir. 1940). “§ 292 notwithstanding a waiver of restrictions permitted by § 272(d), 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (d). The taxpayer paid the full amount of the deficiencies assessed for the years 1922, 1924, 1925 and 1927, including *658 interest from the due date of the taxes to the date of payment.”
Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Stewart, 186 F.2d 239 (6th Cir. 1951). “Section 272(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (a) provides as follows : “If in the case of any taxpayer, fhe Commissioner determines that there is a deficiency in respect of the tax imposed by this chapter, the Commissioner is authorized to send notice of such…”
Roberts v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 176 F.2d 221 (9th Cir. 1949). “On August 21, 1946, the petitioner filed a petition with the Tax Court for a redetermination of the deficiency under the provisions of Section 272 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 . On April 2, 1948, the Court rendered its decision sustaining the deficiency.”
— 26 U.S.C. § 272(a) — 2 cases
Jenkins v. Smith, 21 F. Supp. 433 (D. Conn. 1937).
Fecarotta v. United States, 154 F. Supp. 592 (D. Ariz. 1956).
— 26 U.S.C. § 272(d) — 1 case
Clark v. United States, 211 F.2d 100 (8th Cir. 1954).
— 26 U.S.C. § 272(e) — 3 cases
Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Ray, 88 F.2d 891 (7th Cir. 1937). “” What construction should be given the words appearing in subsection (e) of section 272 ( 26 U.S.C.A. § 272 (e) and note), “if claim therefor is asserted by the Commissioner at or before the hearing or a rehearing”? After the Board made its finding that the $25,000 was income…”
Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Meldrum & Fewsmith, Inc., 230 F.2d 283 (6th Cir. 1956).
Meldrum & Fewsmith, Inc. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 13 T.C.M. 992 (Tax Ct. 1954).
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.