Mehrlust v. Higgins

• Decision Date: 02 November 1939
• Citation: 30 F. Supp. 166
• Parties: MEHRLUST v. HIGGINS, Collector of Internal Revenue.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

30 F. Supp. 166

MEHRLUST v. HIGGINS, Collector of Internal Revenue.

District Court, S. D. New York.

November 2, 1939.

Andrew B. Trudgian, of New York City (Andrew B. Trudgian and David J. Levy, both of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

John T. Cahill, U. S. Atty., for Southern District of New York, of New York City (Noel Hemmendinger, Asst. U. S. Atty., of New York City, of counsel), for defendant.

CLANCY, District Judge.

Plaintiff seeks to recover taxes in the sum of $29,595.65 imposed upon him under § 605 of the Revenue Act of 1932, 26 U.S. C.A. following section 1481, which prescribes a manufacturers excise tax on jewelry. The tax covers sales which the Government claims were made by the plaintiff during a period from June 21, 1932 to June 22, 1936. The section of the law involved was enacted on June 6, 1932 and became effective on June 21, 1932. It placed a ten percent tax on the price of articles of jewelry sold by a manufacturer.

These facts appear in an agreed statement. The plaintiff, long prior to June 6, 1932, was engaged as sole proprietor of his business in the manufacture and sale of jewelry at New York City. On June 17, 1932 J. Mehrlust, Inc., was organized under the Laws of New York State, with an authorized capital of 1,000 shares of no par value stock and on or about June 18, a single certificate of 500 shares was issued to the plaintiff in consideration of $2,500 paid by him in cash. At that time, plaintiff became and he has since continued to be the sole stockholder of the corporation and the only salaried officer thereof. It does not appear in the record whether there have been any other officers nor who they were. On June 18, plaintiff executed to J. Mehrlust, Inc., a bill of sale conveying to the corporation articles of manufactured jewelry owned by him at his inventory price of $628,243. $2,000 of this amount was paid in cash and the balance by a demand note bearing no interest. The corporation paid the note in part by assuming a debt of plaintiff in the sum of $235,000 payable to various banks. The corporation gave its notes, endorsed by J. Mehrlust, to the banks in place of the individual's notes.

This transfer of merchandise from the individual to the corporation was the only such transaction between them. Several purchases of merchandise were subsequently made from others by the corporation. Subsequent to the transfer, the corporation sold the articles included in the bill of sale of June 18 and these sales were regularly entered in the corporation's books. It does not appear whether or not the customers of the corporation were only those previously doing business with the individual, although it does appear that some of the corporation's accounts were with individuals who had previously dealt with him. Some articles which were unsalable were transferred back to J. Mehrlust who refabricated and sold them. Such retransfers were recorded in the stock book of J. Mehrlust, Inc., with the notation "J.M.", sometimes accompanied by the legend "sold to" and at other times by the legend "charged to" but no entries were made in the corporation sales book or the individual's purchase book and they were entered in the individual's journal under the designation "intercompany account." The corporation kept a complete set of books since its inception and bore its own operating expenses including rent, clerical hire, selling costs, and so forth. These items were paid for by the individual who in turn was recompensed by the corporation for its allocated share. The clerical force and office space used by the corporation were substantially the same as that used by the individual prior to June 18, 1932 but it does not appear whether or not these became and continued to be wholly or partly common to both after that date. The articles sold by the corporation to the trade were invoiced under the corporate name on forms previously used by the individual but to which was added a stamped "Inc." which, in a few instances, was inadvertently omitted. Some checks came in payable to the corporation and some to the individual. Of the latter, some were endorsed by the individual and deposited in the corporation account and others were sent back to the customers to be redrawn. The corporation maintained a separate bank account where all monies received by it were deposited and where all monies disbursed by it were withdrawn. The corporation has filed a separate...