Swallows Holding, Ltd. - Page 74

                                        -30-                                          
               Congress ever intended to include the element of time                  
               in the section dealing primarily with the manner of                    
               filing.  * * *  [Id. at 715-716.]                                      
               C.  Mills, Spence & Co.                                                
               In Mills, Spence & Co. v. Commissioner, a Memorandum Opinion           
          of the Board of Tax Appeals dated Oct. 5, 1938, the Board                   
          followed its decision in Anglo-Am. Direct Tea Trading Co. v.                
          Commissioner, supra.  In Mills, Spence & Co., the taxpayer was a            
          foreign corporation that had no offices in the United States but            
          derived income from sources within the United States, thus                  
          requiring it to file Federal income tax returns.  On July 19,               
          1934, the Commissioner informed the taxpayer that it had to file            
          tax returns for 1930 through 1933 because it had received during            
          those years gross income subject to Federal income tax.  The                
          taxpayer filed those returns on February 21, 1936, reporting net            
          losses for each year.  Subsequently, the Commissioner issued a              
          notice of deficiency to the taxpayer that disallowed all of the             
          deductions claimed on the returns.  The Commissioner argued                 
          before the Board that the taxpayer’s failure to file its tax                
          returns timely meant that it was precluded by section 233 of the            
          1928 and 1933 Revenue Acts from deducting its expenses.  The                
          Board disagreed, stating:                                                   
                    That the petitioner received the gross incomes,                   
               incurred the expenses, and sustained the net losses as                 
               set out in the tabulation is not in dispute.  The                      
               contention of respondent is that such expenses are not                 
               deductible, for the sole reason that the petitioner,                   
               being a foreign corporation, is prohibited from                        





Page:  Previous  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011