Question: Which case is cited as the business purpose doctrine: Gregory v. Helvering or Ableman v. Booth?

<P0-S0> Organizational Intelligence (OI) is the capability of an organization to comprehend and conclude knowledge relevant to its business purpose. <P0-S1>  In other words, it is the intellectual capacity of the entire organizations. <P0-S2>  With relevant organizational intelligence comes great potential value for companies and therefore organizations find study where their strengths and weaknesses lie in responding to change and complexity. <P0-S3>  Organizational Intelligence embraces both knowledge management and organizational learning, as it is the application of knowledge management concepts to a business environment, additionally including learning mechanisms, comprehension models and business value network models, such as the balanced scorecard concept. <P0-S4>  Organizational Intelligence consists of the ability to make sense of complex situations and act effectively, to interpret and act upon relevant events and signals in the environment. <P0-S5>  It also includes the ability to develop, share and use knowledge relevant to its business purpose as well as the ability to reflect and learn from experience <SEP> <P1-S0> The step transaction doctrine is a judicial doctrine in the United States that combines a series of formally separate steps, resulting in tax treatment as a single integrated event. <P1-S1>  The doctrine is often used in combination with other doctrines, such as substance over form. <P1-S2>  The doctrine is applied to prevent tax abuse, such as tax shelters or bailing assets out of a corporation. <P1-S3>  The step transaction doctrine originated from a common law principle in "Gregory v. Helvering", 293 U.S. 465 (1935), which allowed the court to recharacterize a tax-motivated transaction. <SEP> <P2-S0>  The Supreme Court held that under the Constitution, the federal courts have the final power to decide cases arising under the Constitution and federal statutes, and that the States do not have the power to overturn those decisions. <P2-S1>  Thus, Wisconsin did not have the authority to nullify federal judgments or statutes. <P2-S2> Ableman v. Booth, 62 U.S. 506 (1859) , was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that State courts cannot issue rulings on federal law that contradict the decisions of federal courts, overturning a decision by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin. <SEP> <P3-S0>  The case is cited as part of the basis for two legal doctrines: the business purpose doctrine and the doctrine of substance over form. <P3-S1> Gregory v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 465 (1935), was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court concerned with U.S. income tax law. <P3-S2>  The business purpose doctrine is essentially that where a transaction has no substantial business purpose other than the tax avoidance and tax evasion|avoidance or reduction]] of Federal tax, the tax law will not regard the transaction. <P3-S3>  The doctrine of substance over form is essentially that, for Federal tax purposes, a taxpayer is bound by the economic substance of a transaction where the economic substance varies from its legal form.