Case Name: GRAIN KING MFG. CO. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1931-02-02
Citations: 47 F.2d 608
Docket Number: No. 39
Parties: GRAIN KING MFG. CO. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 47
Pages: 608–609

Head Matter:
GRAIN KING MFG. CO. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.
No. 39.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Feb. 2, 1931.
Lord, Day & Lord, of New York City (Bernhard Knollenberg, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
G. A. Youngquist, Asst. Atty. Gen., Se-wall Key and Norman D. Keller, Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., and John MaeC. Hudson, of Washington, D. C. (C. M. Charest, Gen. Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and Prew Savory, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for appellee.
Before L. HAND, SWAN, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The petitioner in this ease is a Minnesota corporation having its principal office at St. Paul, Minn. The petition by consent was filed in this court. The only lawful place in which the petitioner could file a return was at St. Paul. Section 992(b), title 26, U..S. Code, 26 USCA § 992(b). Under section 1225(b), title 26, U. S. Code (26 USCA § '1225(b), the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit was the only proper court in which to file a petition to review a decision of the Board. Under our ruling in Massachusetts Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Commissioner, 42 F.(2d) 189, and Nash- Breyer Motor Co. v. Commissioner, 42 F. (2d) 192, the cause could not be brought before us by consent.
The petition is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.