Court Opinion

ID: 4492394
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-01-17 22:03:23.251733+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:03:52.011874
License: Public Domain

Murdock,
dissenting: I believe that a correct result has been reached in the prevailing opinion on the first and last points, but I do not agree that the other issue has been decided properly. The findings of fact indicate that there is insufficient evidence as to many of the items in controversy to determine whether or not they are deductible. Where the petitioner gave away cement of its own manufacture, it did not make sales, and it should not have included the market price of this cement in its gross sales for income-tax purposes. It is a misconception to say that some of these items are “deductible.” It is only necessary to eliminate the items from gross sales to settle the present controversy as to these items.
Marquette agrees with this dissent.