Artnell Co. v. Commissioner case brief summary
400 F.2d 981 (7th Cir. 1968)
SYNOPSIS:
Petitioner transferee taxpayer challenged the judgment of the United
States Tax Court that upheld respondent Commissioner of Internal
Revenue's determination that petitioner had a tax deficiency for the
taxable year ending May 31, 1962. Respondent found that the tax
deficiency was caused by the transferor's improper treatment of proceeds
of advance sales of tickets for baseball games and revenues for related future services as deferred income.
OVERVIEW:
-In 1962 petitioner transferee taxpayer purchased a baseball team that pre-sold season tickets for baseball games, received revenues for broadcasting and televising future games, and sold season parking books.
-On May 31, 1962, petitioner acquired all the stock of the baseball team and filed a tax return for the baseball team as a transferee taxpayer that did not include the deferred unearned income as gross income.
HOLDING:
The tax court affirmed respondent Commissioner of Internal Revenue's determination that found that petitioner had a tax deficiency because the tax return improperly did not include the deferred unearned income as gross income.
ANALYSIS:
-The court stated that the main question was whether respondent had to treat prepayments for services as income when received or whether such treatment was properly deferred by the baseball team as an accrual basis taxpayer until the games were played and other services rendered.
-The court held that the tax court erred in deciding that the revenues were income when received because the tax court failed to determine whether the baseball team's method of accounting clearly reflected its income when it transferred the team to petitioner.
OUTCOME: The court reversed the tax court's judgment that determined that petitioner transferee taxpayer had a tax deficiency for the taxable year ending May 31, 1962, based upon the transferor's improper treatment of proceeds of advance sales of tickets for baseball games and revenues for related future services as deferred income. The court remanded because the tax court did not determine whether the tax return clearly reflected the transferor's income.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
Case briefs for law students, lawyers, and others researching case law. I created many of these briefs in law school and periodically update them from time to time. My goal has been to build a one stop resource center for law students!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Full Outline of The Mountain Is You by Brianna Wiest
The Mountain Is You by Brianna Wiest The Mountain Is You by Brianna Wiest is a transformative self-help book that delves into self-sabo...
-
Case Brief: Brisboy v. Fireboard Paper Products Corporation Court: Michigan Supreme Court Citation: 429 Mich. 540, 418 N.W.2d 650 (1988) D...
-
I can help you land in the top 10% of your law school class. Imagine, how your life would be different if you were in the top 10% o...
-
https://www.pexels.com/photo/coworkers-talking-outside-4427818/ Over the last couple of decades, the face of legal marketing has changed a l...
No comments:
Post a Comment