Comm'r of Internal Revenue v. Court Holding Co.

Decision Date12 March 1945
Docket NumberNo. 581,581
Citation89 L.Ed. 981,65 S.Ct. 707,324 U.S. 331
PartiesCOMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v.
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Mr. Samuel O. Clark, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Mr. Maurice Kay, of Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.

An apartment house, which was the sole asset of the respondent corporation, was transferred in the form of a liquidating dividend to the corporation's two shareholders. They in turn formally conveyed it to a purchaser who had originally negotiated for the purchase from the corporation. The question is whether the Circuit Court of Appeals properly reversed1 the Tax Court's conclusion2 that the corporation was taxable under Section 22 of the Internal Revenue Code3 for the gain which accrued from the sale. The answer depends upon whether the findings of the Tax Court that the whole transaction showed a sale by the corporation rather than by the stockholders were final and binding upon the Circuit Court of Appeals.

It is unnecessary to set out in detail the evidence introduced before the Tax Court or its findings. Despite conflicting evidence, the following findings of the Tax Court are supported by the record:

The respondent corporation was organized in 1934 solely to buy and hold the apartment building which was the only property ever owned by it. All of its outstanding stock was owned by Minnie Miller and her husband. Between October 1, 1939 and February, 1940, while the corporation still had legal title to the property, negotiations for its sale took place. These negotiations were between the corporation and the lessees of the property, together with a sister and brother-in-law. An oral agreement was reached as to the terms and conditions of sale, and on February 22, 1940, the parties met to reduce the agreement to writing. The purchaser was then advised by the corporation's attorney that the sale could not be consummated because it would result in the imposition of a large income tax on the corporation. The next day, the corporation declared a 'liquidating dividend', which involved complete liquidation of its assets, and surrender of all outstanding stock. Mrs. Miller and her husband surrendered their stock, and the building was deeded to them. A sale contract was then drawn, naming the Millers individually as vendors, and the lessees' sister as vendee, which embodied substantially the same terms and conditions previously agreed upon. One thousand dollars, which a month and a half earlier had been paid to the corporation by the lessees, was applied in part payment of the purchase price. Three days later, the property was conveyed to the lessees' sister.

The Tax Court concluded from these facts that, despite the declaration of a 'liquidating dividend' followed by the transfers of legal title, the corporation had not abandoned the sales negotiations; that these were mere formalities designed 'to make the transaction appear to be other than what it was', in order to avoid tax liability. The Circuit Court of Appeals drawing different inferences from the record, held that the corporation had 'called off' the sale, and treated the stockholders' sale as unrelated to the prior negotiations.

There was evidence to support the findings of the Tax Court, and its findings must therefore be accepted by the courts. Dobson v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 320 U.S. 489, 64 S.Ct. 239, 88 L.Ed. 248; Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Heininger, 320 U.S. 467, 64 S.Ct. 249, 88 L.Ed. 171; Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Scottish American Investment Co., 323 U.S. 119, 65 S.Ct. 169, On the basis of these findings, the Tax Court was justified in attributing the gain from the sale to respondent corporation. The incidence of taxation depends upon the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
942 cases
  • Hollywood Baseball Ass'n v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Docket No. 93647.
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • 21 Abril 1964
    ...No. 1622, 83d Cong., 2d Sess., pp. 258-260 (1954); H.Rept. No. 1337, 83d Cong., 2d Sess., pp. A106-A109 (1954). Cf. Commissioner v. Court Holding Co., 324 U.S. 331; United States v. Cumberland Pub. Serv. Co., 338 U.S. 451. Gain realized is therefore not recognized at the corporate level if ......
  • In re Krause
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Tenth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — District of Kansas
    • 21 Abril 2008
    ...debtor's actions were deliberate evasion.); Epstein, supra. 146. Dalton, 77 F.3d at 1304 quoting Commissioner v. Court Holding Co., 324 U.S. 331, 334, 65 S.Ct. 707, 708, 89 L.Ed. 981 (1945). 147. 344 F.Supp.2d 715 (D.Kan.2004), aff'd 161 Fed.Appx. 742 (10th Cir. Dec.5, 148. Dawes was decide......
  • Santa Monica Pictures, LLC, v. Commissioner, Dkt. No. 6163-03.
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • 11 Mayo 2005
    ...depends upon the substance of a transaction" rather than its mere form. Commissioner v. Court Holding Co. [45-1 USTC ¶ 9215], 324 U.S. 331, 334 (1945). In determining the substance of a transaction for Federal tax purposes, we are guided by the foundational principles that the U.S. Supreme ......
  • Kraft Foods Company v. Commissioner of Internal Rev., 7
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 2 Abril 1956
    ...60 S.Ct. 277, 84 L.Ed. 319; Higgins v. Smith, 1941, 308 U.S. 473, 60 S.Ct. 355, 84 L.Ed. 406; Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court Holding Co., 1945, 324 U.S. 331, 65 S.Ct. 707, 89 L.Ed. 981; Bazley v. Commissioner, 1947, 331 U.S. 737, 67 S.Ct. 1489, 91 L.Ed. 1782; Commissioner of Inte......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 firm's commentaries
  • Service Applies Substance Over Form Doctrine To DisallowDividends-Received Deduction
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 2 Agosto 2013
    ...include a portion of the CFC's earnings in its income as a result of Section 1248. Sections 871(a)and (b). Court Holding Co., 33 AFTR 593, 324 US 331, 89 L Ed 981, 1945 CB 58 (1945). Frank Lyon Co., 41 AFTR 2d 78-1142, 435 US 561, 55 L Ed 2d 550, 1978-1 CB 46 (1978). The Section 954(b)(3)de......
  • The Economic Substance Doctrine: A U.S. Anti-Abuse Rule
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 5 Mayo 2022
    ...the years: The incidence of taxation depends upon the substance of the transaction and not mere formalism. (Commr. v. Court Holding Co., 324 U.S. 331, 334 Taxation is not so much concerned with refinements of title as it is with actual command over the property. (Corliss v. Bowers, 281 U.S.......
  • Revenue Ruling 98-27 and New Spin-off Control Provision in IRS Restructuring Bill
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 7 Abril 2004
    ...the acquisition would precede the spin-off distribution) pursuant to the step-transaction doctrine of Commissioner v. Court Holding Co., 324 U.S. 331 (1944). Pursuant to such a reordering, the distributing corporation would be treated as exchanging the stock of its subsidiary for 25% of the......
  • IRS Concludes Corporations Were Ignored For Asset Sale
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 17 Abril 2013
    ...Property A to the buyer in substance and disregarded Newco 2 and Newco 1, citing Rev. Rul. 70-140 and Comm'r v. Court Holding Company (324 U.S. 331). The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific...
11 books & journal articles
  • Can the battle be won? Compaq, the sham transaction doctrine, and a critique of proposals to combat the corporate tax shelter dragon.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 149 No. 1, November 2000
    • 1 Noviembre 2000
    ...with the expectation that the Internal Revenue Service and the courts will play along."). (29) See, e.g., Comm'r v. Court Holding Co., 324 U.S. 331, 334 (1945) ("The incidence of taxation depends upon the substance of a transaction."); Helvering v. F. & R. Lazarus & Co., 308 U.S. 25......
  • Relational tax planning under risk-based rules.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 156 No. 5, May 2008
    • 1 Mayo 2008
    ...and sell them to the buyer* If the two steps were too interlinked, however, they were combined. Compare Comm'r v. Court Holding Co., 324 U.S. 331 (1945) (affirming the Tax Court judgment linking the steps), with United States v. Cumberland Pub. Serv., 338 U.S. 451 (1950) (upholding the Cour......
  • Significant recent developments in estate planning.
    • United States
    • The Tax Adviser Vol. 26 No. 11, November 1995
    • 1 Noviembre 1995
    ...435 (July 1995). (3) Evelyn F. Gregory v. Helvering, 293 US 465 (1935)(14 AFTR 1191, 35-1 USTC [paragraph] 29043). (4) Court Holding Co., 324 US 331 (1945)(33 AFTR 593, 45-1 USTC [paragraph]19215); Arnold Malkan, 54 TC 1305 (1970), acq. 1971-2 CB 3; Est. of Margita Applestein, 80 TC 331 (19......
  • A walk through the step-transaction doctrine.
    • United States
    • The Tax Adviser Vol. 52 No. 5, May 2021
    • 1 Mayo 2021
    ...1428(1987). (2.) Jacobs. 224 F.2d 412. 413 (9th Cir. 1955), citing Cumberland Pub. Serv. Co., 338 U.S. 451 (1950); Court Holding Co., 324 U.S. 331 (1945). (3.) Field Service Advice 1999-1095. (4.) Komfeld, 137 F.3d 1231 (10th Cir. 1998). atf'g T.C. Memo. 1996-472. (5.) Associated Wholesale ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT