LITTLETON, Judge.
Plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial on the ground that the court erred in holding that he could not recover, for the reason that he did not include in his claim for refund the facts or a claim for a deduction from his distributive share of the net income of the partnership his pro rata share of the excess profits tax paid by the partnership for 1917.
It is not claimed that this matter was brought to the attention of the Commissioner...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
