Court Opinion

ID: 9642633
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 18:04:54.856657+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:50.234704
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
The respondent moves that an order be directed to the Board of Tax Appeals requiring it to prepare and forward the original tax returns of the respondent and the Liberty National Bank for the years 1919, 1920,.and 1921. In support of the motion, it is stated that such exhibits will disclose that the bank and the company filed separate returns for the years prior to 1922, and that the government first asserted affiliation in 1924. It is stated in the motion that affiliation for those years is conceded.
This motion should be denied for the following reasons:
(a) Section 240(a) of the Revenue Act of 1918 (40 Stat. 1081) requires that a consolidated return shall be made by affiliated corporations. It would avail respondent nothing to show that it had not complied with the statute.
(b) In its petition filed before the Board of Tax Appeals, thei respondent alleged that the government treated the respondent as affiliated with the Liberty National Bank during” the taxable year in question. This allegation was admitted by the Commissioner. It appears, therefore, that no issue was framed before the Board of Tax Appeals on the question now sought to be presented to this court.
(c) The Board of Tax Appeals made a specific finding of fact that “from the date of its organization until the close of the taxable year 1921 the petitioner and the Liberty National Bank filed consolidated income tax returns which were accepted by the Commissioner.” The evidence taken before the Board of Tax Appeals is not in the record. Manifestly this court should not set aside a finding of fact made by the Board, after hearing the evidence, when the evidence has not been preserved for our review.
(d) In its brief filed in this court, the respondent stated that the following facts are presented by the record:
“In computing the consolidated net income of the respondent and the Liberty National Bank for the year 1921, your petitioner (the respondent below) ‘recognized no profit on the inter-company sale of Liberty Bonds.’ * * *
“Inasmuch as respondent and the Liberty National Bank were admittedly affiliated dur*62ing the year 1921, it is at once apparent that the mandatory language of See. 210 (e), of the Revenue Act of 1918 (quoted supra), required determination of both corporations’ tax liability for the taxable year 1921, on the basis of a consolidated return.”
In its motion filed in this court, the respondent does not say that a tax was paid upon this transaction in 1921, by either corporation, which is the material fact adverted to in our opinion.
The motion to supplement the record, and the petition for a rehearing, is denied.
The mandate is stayed for thirty days as provided by rule 29(3) of this court.