Archbold v. Helvering
ARCHBOLD v. HELVERING, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, and three other cases
Subsequent history: rev'd sub nom. Helvering v. Reynolds, 313 U.S. 428 (1941). (read from the later opinion; check before relying)
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM.
This case presents no other questions than those decided in Van Vranken v. Helvering, 2 Cir., 115 F.2d 709 , handed down herewith. It is true that here the trusts were not testamentary; but had been set up by a deed of the taxpayer’s ancestor, executed in 1910. The relevant statute is not § 113 (a) (5) of the Act of 1934, 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Acts, page 697, but § 113(a) (4) of the Act of 1932, 26 U.S. C.A. Int.Rev.Acts, page 515, and that has remained unchanged from the time of its first enactment in 1921. This might have required some separate consideration, if we had depended upon the changes in § 113(a) (5) in reaching our conclusion; but we did *1006 not. Again, there was in 1933 no regulation interpreting § 113(a) (4), but that too is not important, for we have not depended upon the regulation of 1934 in our reasoning in Van Vranken v. Helvering. Our discussion there can therefore serve here.
Orders affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.