Case: Samuel Bell and Sons, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent; Moore Bread Company, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent; Commercial Garage Company, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Abbreviation: Samuel Bell & Sons v. Commissioner
Decision Date: 1931-03-18
Docket Number: Docket Nos. 38056, 41645, 41646, 41647, 45616
Citation: 22 B.T.A. 793
Volume: 22
Reporter: Reports of the United States Board of Tax Appeals
Court: United States Board of Tax Appeals
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Samuel Bell and Sons, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent. Moore Bread Company, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent. Commercial Garage Company, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent.
Judges: 
Pages: 793–798

Head Matter:
Samuel Bell and Sons, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent. Moore Bread Company, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent. Commercial Garage Company, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent.
Docket Nos. 38056, 41645, 41646, 41647, 45616.
Promulgated March 18, 1931.
W. B. Lex, Esq., Ellis N. Slack, Esq., O. J. Hepburn, Esq., Charles C. Norris, Jr., Esq., and Byron G. Carson, Esq., for the petitioners.
Eugene Meacham, Esq., and C. E. Lowery, Esq., for the respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION.
Van Fossan:
The question in these cases is whether or not the minority stockholders, employees of the various companies, constitute the same interests as the majority stockholders. We had the same question presented on very similar facts in Baker Lumber Co., 21 B. T. A. 124, and M. W. S. Realty Co., 21 B. T. A. 133. In those cases we granted affiliation. See also Kile and Morgan Co., 41 Fed. (2d) 925. On the authority of those cases we hold the petitioning corporations were affiliated during all of the years in question, i. e., 1924, 1926, and 1927. The community of interest among the stockholders and the restrictive provisions on the stock were even stronger in the cases at bar than in the cited cases.
Judgment will be entered under Rule 50.