255 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Insured's misrepresen-424 (U.S.C.C.A.Fla.) Damage caused by
tation, to invalidate life policy, must be of such
importance that, but for such misrepresenta-
tion, company would not have written policy.-
New York Life Ins. Co. v. Cumins, 24 F. (2d) 1.

366 (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Failure to affirmatively
select any of nonforfeiture options of life pol-539(5) (U.S.D.C.Fla.) Insurer held not en-
icy within time allowed for selecting two of the
three options held equivalent to affirmative se-
lection of third option, which applied auto-
matically.-Burns v. Bankers' Life Co., 24 F.
(28) 714.

1053

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

when mortgage was placed as claimed.-Niagara
Fire Ins. Co. v. McCord, 24 F. (2d) 491.

668 (6) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Materiality of in-
sured's misrepresentation in securing life policy
is for jury in doubtful case.-New York Life
Ins. Co. v. Cumins, 24 F. (2d) 1.

668 (7) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Whether insured
consulted doctor contrary to representations, or
between date of medical examination and de-
livery of policy, held for jury.-New York Life
Ins. Co. v. Cumins, 24 F. (2d) 1.

668(15) (U.S.C.C.A.Ind.) Evidence did not.
raise issue for jury whether insured told in-
surer's agent he had mortgaged property, and
insured relied on agent's promise to make in-
dorsement.-Niagara Fire Ins. Co. v. McCord,
24 F. (2d) 491.

Evidence did not raise issue for jury on
whether insurer's agent waived provision of
fire insurance policy requiring written consent
to mortgage.-Id.

Evidence did not raise issue for jury whether
fire insurer waived provision requiring con-
sent to mortgage, because not tendering pre-
mium sooner.-Id.

INTEREST.

I. RIGHTS AND LIABILITIES IN GENERAL.
22(3) (U.S.D.C.Cal.) Federal court decree
in equity ex propria vigore does not carry in-
terest subsequent to its date.-U. S. v. Pan-
American Petroleum Co., 24 F. (2d) 206.

26 (U.S.D.C.Cal.) In suit to cancel oil leas-
es, government by failing to prevent further tak-
ing of royalty oil after appointment of receiv-
ers, waives right to interest on oil subsequently
taken (Civ. Code Cal. § 3287).-U. S. v. Pan-
American Petroleum Co., 24 F. (2d) 206.

II. RATE.

31 (U.S.D.C.Cal.) On cancellation of oil
leases for fraud, government held entitled to 7
per cent. interest on value of property convert-
ed; rate being legal rate where property was lo-
cated (Civ. Code Cal. 1915, § 1917; Gen. Laws
Cal. Act 3757).-U. S. v. Pan-American Petro-
leum Co., 24 F. (2d) 206.

IV. RECOVERY.

66 (U.S.D.C.Cal.) Allegations in govern-
ment's bill to cancel oil leases for fraud held to
entitle government to interest on property con-
verted without specifically demanding it in
pleadings.-U. S. v. Pan-American Petroleum
Co., 24 F. (2d) 206.

INTERNAL REVENUE.

2(10) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Taxing income of
domestic export corporations and exempting
similar corporations organized in Porto Rico
or Philippine Islands held not unlawful dis-
crimination (Revenue Act 1918, §§ 230[a],
233[b], 301 [Comp. St. §§ 6336% nn, 6336p,
6336746aa]: Const. Amend. 5).-Neuss Hesslein
& Co. v. Edwards, 24 F. (2d) 989.

2(11). (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Statute taxing prior
property transfers intended to take effect after
death is invalid (Revenue Act 1918, § 402 [e],
being Comp. St. § 63364c).-Stark v. U. S., 24
F.(2d) 237.

7(3) (U.S.C.C.A.) Husband held not subject
to income tax on entire profits of a business,
25 per cent. of which was owned and the
profits received by his wife.-Hamilton v. Com-
missioner of Internal Revenue, 24 F. (2d) 668.

7(7) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Date of payment, not
declaration, of dividend, is distribution date for
income tax purposes (Revenue Act 1916, § 31,
subsecs. [a], [b], as added by Act Oct. 3. 1917,
§ 1211 [Comp. St. § 6336z]).-U. S. v. Phillips,
24 F. (2d) 195, reversing judgment (D. C.)
Phillips v. U. S., 12 F.(2d) 598.

7(8) (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Bequest expressly as
payment for services as executor and trustee

held taxable as "income" (Revenue Act 1918, §
213 [Comp. St. § 6336%ff]).-Grant v. Rose,
24 F.(2d) 115.

7(11) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Accretions from sale of
securities in trust, though belonging to corpus,
are taxable as income.-Warden v. Lederer, 24
F. (2d) 233.

7(11) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Profit from sale of
real estate acquired before March 1, 1913, to
be computed on its fair market value on that
date (Revenue Act 1918, § 202[a], par. 1
[Comp. St. § 6336% bb]).-Hewes v. Heiner,
24 F. (2d) 748.

7(14) (U.S.D.C.Conn.) Income from trust
estate held not taxable as income of beneficiary,
who had divested herself of all interest by an
irrevocable assignment.-O'Malley-Keyes v. Ea-
ton, 24 F. (2d) 436.

7(17) (U.S.C.C.A.) Taxpayer held not en-
titled to deduction from gross income for ex-
haustion of leaseholds.-Metropolitan Business
College v. Blair, 24 F. (2d) 176.

7(18) (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Whatever salaries a
corporation pays its officers, it is entitled to de-
duction of only reasonable salaries from income
return (Revenue Act 1918, § 234[a]).-U. S. v.
Snook, 24 F. (2d) 844.

7 (20) (U.S.C.C.A.N.J.) Bank held entitled
to deduction from gross income of tax paid
under New Jersey Bank Stock Tax Act (Rev-
enue Act 1916, § 12[a], [Comp. St. § 63361];
Bank Stock Tax Act N. J. § 8).-Ferguson v.
Fidelity Union Trust Co.. 24 F. (2d) 520, af-
firming judgment (D. C.) Fidelity Union Trust
Co. v. Ferguson, 17 F. (2d) 660.

tax

~7 (20) (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Where income
return was made on accrual basis, tax on profits
on munitions in 1916 should have been deducted
from 1916 income return, though paid in 1917
(Internal Revenue Act 1916, §§ 12[a], 13[d]).-
Aluminum Castings Co. v. Routzahn, 24 F. (2d)
230.

7 (22) (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Life tenant of office
building held entitled to allowance for deprecia-
tion (section 214, subd. 8. Revenue Acts 1918
and 1921 [Comp. St. § 6336%g]).-Grant v.
Rose, 24 F. (2d) 115.

Life tenant held entitled to allowance for de-
preciation of capital improvements made by
him (section 214, subd. S. Revenue Acts 1918
and 1921 [Comp. St. § 6336% g]).-Id.

7 (23) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Deposits with mu-
tual insurance company, used only to pay losses
and expenses, balance being returned to mem-
bers, were not income subject to tax (Revenue
Act 1916, as amended).-Jewelers' Safety Fund
Soc. v. Edwards, 24 F. (2d) 385, affirming judg-
ment (D. C.) 12 F. (2d) 458.

Interest on invested deposits of mutual in-
surance company, where excess, after meeting
members' obligations, was returned to members,
was not subject to income tax, but could be de-
ducted from gross income (Revenue Act 1916. §
12[a], second [c], [b]; Comp. St. § 63367).—Id.

7 (24) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Use of word "pre-
mium" in by-laws of mutual insurance company
was not conclusive on whether amounts paid
constituted income subject to tax (Revenue
Act 1916, as amended).-Jewelers' Safety Fund
Soc. v. Edwards, 24 F. (2d) 385, affirming judg-
ment (D. C.) 12 F. (2d) 458.

7 (27) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) British subject,
but intending
managing shipping company,
eventually to return to England, held "resident
alien," within income tax law (Revenue Act
Sept. 8, 1916 [39 Stat. 756], as amended by Act
March 3, 1917 [39 Stat. 1000], as further
amended by Act Oct. 3, 1917 [40 Stat. 300];
Revenue Act Feb. 24, 1919, §§ 210, 213 [Comp.
St. $$ 6336%e, 6336% ff]; Revenue Act Nov.
23, 1921, § 213 [Comp. St. § 6336% ff]).—Bow-
ring v. Bowers, 24 F. (2d)_918.

7 (27) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Profit on sale of se-
curities in trust, added to corpus, held taxable
as income of trust estate not of donor.-Warden
v. Lederer, 24 F.(2d) 233.

7(28) (U.S.C.C.A.) Corporation having
capital of $100,000, conducting business college
with 12 branches and employing 54 teachers,
held not "personal service corporation," within
statute (Revenue Act 1918, §§ 200, 218 [Comp.
St. §§ 6336a, 6336i]).-Metropolitan Busi-
ness College v. Blair, 24 F. (2d) 176.

7(28) (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Where stockholders
owning 80 per cent. of stock were conducting
insurance agency corporation's business, it was
"personal service corporation" for taxation pur-
poses (Revenue Act 1918, §§ 200. 218 [e], being
Comp. St. §§ 6336%a, 6336i).-Harry S.
Kaufman, Limited, v. Commissioner of Inter-
nal Revenue, 24 F. (2d) 44.

Income of insurance agency corporation,
claimed to be personal service corporation for
taxation purposes, was not ascribed primarily
to local agents' activities (Revenue Act 1918,
$$ 200, 218 [e], being Comp. St. §§ 6336%a,
6336i).-Id.

7(36) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) United States cit-
izens domiciled elsewhere must pay income tax-
es on entire income.-Bowring v. Bowers, 24
F. (2d) 918.

subject to tax (Revenue Act 1918, §§ 500, 501
[d]; Comp. St. §§ 6309a, 6309b).-Dixie
Oil Co. v. U. S., 24 F. (2d) 804, affirming judg-
ment (D. C.) 23 F. (2d) 888.

9 (25) (U.S.C.C.A.Wis.) Deductible loss in
determining corporation's taxable income de-
circumstances
on particular
pends largely
(Excise Tax Act 1909, § 38, par. 2, cl. 2).—
Wilkinson v. Hamilton Mfg. Co., 24 F. (2d)
486, affirming judgment (D. C.) Hamilton Mfg.
Co. v. Wilkinson, 19 F. (2d) 365.

Sale of property is only one way of ascer-
taining loss deductible in determining taxable
income (Excise Tax Act 1909, § 38, par. 2, cl.
2).-Id.

Transaction whereby actual loss was deduct-
ed in return for 1910 will not be reopened to
fix income tax under statute passed in 1919
(Excise Tax Act 1909, § 38, par. 2, cl. 2; In-
come Tax Act 1918).-Id.

9(26) (U.S.D.C.Mass.) Elevated railway
company, while operated by state, held subject
to capital stock tax (Sp. Acts Mass. 1918, c.
159; Revenue Act 1918, § 1000 [a], subd. 1
[Comp. St. § 5980n]).-Boston Elevated R. Co.
v. Malley, 24 F. (2d) 758.

8(2) (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Federal estate tax law
is an excise on transfer of property by death.-9 (27) (U.S.C.C.A.Ala.) Cost of extending
Stark v. U. S., 24 F. (2d) 237.

8(3) (U.S.D.C.Wyo.) For purpose of es-
tate tax, alien decedent held resident of United
States. Cooper v. Reynolds, 24 F. (2d) 150.

8(5) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Proceeds of life policy
payable to wife "in trust," which were not dis-
posed of by will, held subject to estate tax (Rev-
enue Act 1918, § 402 [a], [f]; Comp. St. §
63364c).-Union Trust Co. of Pittsburgh v.
McCaughn, 24 F. (2d) 459.

.

Where proceeds of life policy were payable to
wife in trust, half of proceeds bequeathed to
wife in insured's will held not subject to estate
tax (Revenue Act 1918, § 402, subd. [a]; Comp.
St. § 63364c; Pa. St. 1920, § 12262).-Id.

8(11) (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Donor's reservation
of power to modify, control, and use income of
trust, to take effect in possession and enjoyment
after death. held not to prevent vesting of re-
mainders (Revenue Act 1918, § 402 [cl. being
Comp. St. § 63364c).--Stark v. U. S., 24 F. (2d)
237.

Statute taxing transfers to take effect after
death held not to require donor of previously
created trust to surrender reserved rights of
modification, revocation, life income, and control
(Act Feb. 24, 1919 [40 Stat. 1057]).-Id.

held

8(13) (U.S.C.C.A.III.) Reservations
not to bring trust within law requiring inclusion
in gross estate (Revenue Act 1921, § 402 [c],
being Comp. St. § 6336c).-Reinecke v. North-
ern Trust Co., 24 F. (2d) 91.

Trust created before enactment of provision
requiring inclusion in gross estate, if taking
effect in possession or enjoyment after death,
does not come thereunder (Revenue Act, 1921,
§ 402 [c], being Comp. St. § 63364c).—Id.

8(14) (U.S.C.C.A.Ala.) Trustees' power to
invade corpus of trust estate did not preclude
deduction for estate tax purposes of bequest of
residue to charitable institutions (Revenue Act
of 1921, § 403 [a] 3 [Comp. St. § 6336d]).—
First Nat. Bank v. Snead, 24 F.(2d) 186.

slopes in coal mine is "invested capital" (Rev-
enue Act 1917, § 201 [Comp. St. § 63363b]).—
Blockton Cahaba Coal Co. v. U. S., 24 F.(2d)
180, reversing judgment (D. C.) Little Cahaba
Coal Co. v. Ú. S., 15 F. (2d) 863.

9 (27) (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Where stockholders
owning 80 per cent. of stock were conducting
insurance agency corporation's business, it was
"personal service corporation" for taxation pur-
poses (Revenue Act 1918, §$ 200, 218 [e], be-
ing Comp. St. §§ 6336a, 6336%i).-Harry S.
Kaufman, Limited, v. Commissioner of Internal
Revenue, 24 F. (2d) 44.

Income of insurance agency corporation,
claimed to be personal service corporation for
taxation purposes, was not ascribed primarily
to local agents' activities (Revenue Act 1918, §§
200, 218 [el, being Comp. St. §§ 6336a,
6336%i).-Id.

9(27) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Use of word “pre-
mium" in by-laws of mutual insurance company
was not conclusive on whether amounts paid
constituted income subject to tax (Revenue Act
1916, as amended). Jewelers' Safety Fund Soc.
v. Edwards, 24 F. (2d) 385, affirming judgment
(D. C.) 12 F. (2d) 458.

Deposits with mutual insurance company, used
only to pay losses and expenses, balance being
returned to members, were not income subject
to tax (Revenue Act 1916, as amended).-Id.

Interest on invested deposits of mutual insur-
ance company, where excess, after meeting
members' obligations, was returned to mem-
bers, was not subject to income tax, but could
be deducted from gross income (Revenue
Act 1916, § 12 [a], second [c], [b]; Comp.
St. § 63361).-Id.

(U.S.D.C.Mo.) Corporation organized
for investigation, discussion, and improvement
of municipal conditions held not a "social club or
organization," within Revenue Act (Revenue
Acts 1918. 1921, § 801 [Comp. St. § 63095b]).
will-City Club of St. Louis v. U. S., 24 F. (2d) 743.

8(14) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Construction of
giving trustees power to defeat bequests for
religious, educational and charitable purposes,
thereby rendering entire estate taxable, held un-
warranted (Revenue Act 1918, § 403 [Comp.
St. Ann. Supp. 1919, § 63364d]).-Herron v.
Heiner, 24 F. (2d) 745.

9(7) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Mutual insurance
company held chargeable with premium tax,
though not subject to income or excess profits
taxes (Revenue Act 1917, § 504 [Comp. St. §
6309a]; Revenue Act 1916, as amended).—
Jewelers' Safety Fund Soc. v. Edwards, 24 F.
(2d) 385, affirming judgment (D. C.) 12 F. (2d)
458.

9(14) (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Oil producer, trans-
porting its oil through its own pipe line, held

16 (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Oleomargarine contain-
ing ingredients used in substantial amounts for
other purposes than coloration is within statu-
tory proviso imposing smaller tax on oleomar-
garine free from artificial coloration (Internal
Revenue Regulations No. 9, § 43[6], [c]; Act
May 9, 1902, § 3, amending Oleomargarine Act
1886. § 8 [26 USCA § 546]).-Foley v. Miller,
24 F. (2d) 722.

"Artificial coloration," in statute taxing oleo-
margarine, is opposite of "natural coloration;"
"artificial;" "coloration" (Act May 9, 1902, § 3,
amending Oleomargarine Act 1886, § 8 [26
USCA § 546]).—Id.

Production of yellow color by treatment of
cotton seed and cocoanut oils, constituting 24

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am,Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

per cent. of oleomargarine, held not "artificial coloration," within statute imposing smaller tax on oleomargarine free therefrom (Act May 9, 1902, § 3, amending Oleomargarine Act 1886, § 8 [26 USCA § 546]).—Id.

23 (U.S.D.C.S.C.) Surety on bond given to secure extension of time for payment of income tax may not have lien for taxes enforced on theory of subrogation or exoneration, where taxes remain unpaid (26 USCA § 115).-Maryland Casualty Co. v. Charleston Lead Works, 24 F. (2d) 836.

Collector of internal revenue held not proper party in suit to compel enforcement of lien for federal income taxes brought by surety on taxpayer's bond given to secure extension of income tax payment (26 USCA §§ 104. 115; Act March 3. 1887. §§ 5, 6 [28 USCA §§ 762, 763]: Rev. St. § 3207, as amended by Revenue Act 1924, § 1030, as re-enacted in Revenue Act 1926, § 1127 [26 USCA § 136]).-Id.

25 (U.S.C.C.A.) Decision of Board of Tax Appeals on evidence introduced and arguments presented before enactment of 1926 Revenue Act held not reviewable (Revenue Act 1924, § 274 [a], being 26 USCA § 1048; Revenue Act 1926, § 283 [j], being 26 USCA § 1064 [j]).Blair v. Curran, 24 F. (2d) 390.

Review of decision of Board of Tax Appeals is limited to questions of law (Revenue Act 1924, §§ 274 [b], 900 [g], being 26 USCA §§ 1049, 1218; Act 1924, § 907 [a], as added by Act 1926, § 1000, being,26 USCA § 1219 [a]; Revenue Act 1926, §§ 283 [j]. 284 [d], 1001 [b], and 1003, being 26 USCA §§ 1064 [j], 1065 [d, 1224 [b], 1226).—Id.

25 (U.S.C.C.A.) Sole remedy from adverse decision of Board of Tax Appeals is statutory review by Circuit Court of Appeals (Revenue Act 1926, § 1001[a]; 26 USCA § 1224[a]).

Blair, v. Hendricks, 24 F. (2d) 819.

Determination of Board of Tax Appeals, rendered after effective date of Revenue Act 1926, held not reviewable, where hearings were held before such date (Revenue Act 1926, § 283[j], and § 1001[a]: 26 USCA § 1064[j], and g 1224[a]; Revenue Act 1924, § 274[b], and 900[g]; 26 USCA §§ 1049, 1218).-Id.

25 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Under 1921 Revenue Act, assessment of deficiency income tax must be against corporation whose return was examined (Revenue Act 1918, § 230 [Comp. St. $6336nn]; Revenue Act 1921, § 250 [d], 42 Stat. 264).-Dreyfuss Dry Goods Co. v. Lines, 24 F. (2d) 29, reversing judgment (D. C.) 18 F. (2d) 611.

Assessment against partnership, which took over corporation's assets, for deficiency in corporation's income tax, held invalid (Revenue Act 1918, $230 [Comp. St. § 6336nn]; Revenue Act 1921, § 250 [d], 42 Stat. 264).-Id.

Assessment against partnership of additional income tax due from corporation was not justified, though tax, if assessed against corpora tion, was collectable from partnership (Revenue Act 1918, § 230 [Comp. St. § 6336nn]; Revenue Act 1921, § 250 [d], 42 Stat. 264).-Id.

25 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Evidence did not support conclusion that stockholder was not regularly engaged in company's business, within statute defining personal service corporation for taxation purposes (Revenue Act 1918, § 200 [Comp. St. § 6336a]).-Harry S. Kaufman, Limited, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 24 F. (2d) 44.

25 (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Fair market price or value of corporate stock for income tax purposes is fact question, depending on circumstances (Revenue Act 1916, § 2, subd. [c], being Comp. St. § 6336b, subd. [e]; Revenue Act 1917, § 1200, subd. [a], being Comp. St. § 6336b, subd. [a]).-Heiner v. Crosby, 24 F. (2d) 191, affirming judgment (D. C.) Crosby v. Heiner, 12 F. (2d) 604.

"Market price" of corporate stock for income tax purposes implies market, supply and de

mand, sellers and buyers (Revenue Act 1916, § 2, subd. [c], being Comp. St. § 6336b, subd [c]; Revenue Act 1917, § 1200, subd. [a], being Comp. St. § 6336b, subd. [a]).-Id.

25 (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Right of choice of husband and wife between making separate or joint return terminates on expiration of time for filing return (Revenue Act, 1921, § 223 [Comp. St. § 63361⁄4kk]).-Grant v. Rose, 24 F. (2d) 115.

25 (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Taxpayer's declaration that income return was made on basis of actual receipts and disbursements was not controlling (Internal Revenue Act 1916, §§ 12 [a], 13 [d]). -Aluminum Castings Co. v. Routzahn, 24 F. (2d) 230.

Income return could not be regarded as made on basis of receipts and disbursements, because it was made according to practice prevailing when law required returns on that basis (Internal Revenue Act 1916, §§ 12 [a], 13 [d]).— Id.

Facts showed taxpayer's books were kept and income return was made on "accrual basis" (Internal Revenue Act 1916, §§ 12 [a], 13 [d]).Id.

results from what is done, notwithstanding tax-
Election to make tax returns on accrual basis
Revenue Act 1916, § 13 [d]).-Id.
payer may disclaim such intention (Internal

26 (U.S.D.C.S.C.) Lien for nonpayment of mediately on failure to pay tax (26 USCA § income tax is statutory lien, and attaches im115).-Maryland Casualty Co. v. Charleston Lead Works, 24 F. (2d) 836.

Statutory procedure prescribed for enforcement of lien for unpaid income tax held exclusive (Rev. St. § 3207, as amended by Revenue Act 1924, § 1030, as re-enacted in Revenue

Act 1926, § 1127 [26 USCA § 136]).—Id.

Lien on taxpayer's property for unpaid federal income taxes is property of United States, not subject to disposition of collector of internal revenue (26 USCA § 115).—Id.

27(1) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Corporation voluntarily paying additional tax pursuant to amended return held liable for interest on such amount (Revenue Act 1921, § 250[b]; Comp. St. § 6336%tt).-Union Pac. R. Co. v. Bowers, 24 F. (2d) 788, affirming judgment (D. C.) 21 F. (2d) 856.

28(1) (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Assessment against partnership for additional corporate income tax, if considered as assessment against defunct corporation, did not authorize collection by summary demand under threat of distraint (Revenue Act 1918, § 230 [Comp. St. § 6336% nn]; Revenue Act 1921, § 250 [d], 42 Stat. 264; 26 USCA § 116).-Dreyfuss Dry Goods Co. v. Lines, 24 F. (2d) 29, reversing judgment (D. C.) 18 F. (2d) 611.

28(1) (U.S.D.C.Mass.) Collecting tax outlawed by limitations by distraint held illegal (Revenue Act 1926, § 1108 [26 USCA § 1249]). -Brady v, U. S., 24 F. (2d) 205.

~28(2) (U.S.D.C.Cal.). Formal assessment is not necessary condition precedent to collect tax (Revenue Act 1924, § 310 [26 USCA § 1110]).—— U. S. v. Kelley, 24 F.(2d) 234.

Part of estate tax erroneously refunded through mistake of law is not a "deficiency," so that notice to executrix was not required before bringing suit for collection (Revenue Act 1924, § 308 et seq. [26 USCA §§ 1101-1104, 1106-1108 et seq.]; Revenue Act 1926, § 308, subd. [a]; 26 USCA § 1101).—Id.

Suit to recover estate tax may be brought in district where estate was settled (26 USCA § 142).-Id.

28 (2) (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Corporation practically dissolved held not necessary party to suit against stockholders to recover income taxes assessed against corporation.-U. S. v. Snook, 24 F. (2d) 844.

In suit against stockholders for tax, officers cannot be required to account to corporation for

excessive salaries received for purposes of income tax.-Id.

28(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Pa.) Suit to restrain execution of distraint warrant for internal revenue taxes against distillery held not maintainable by purchaser at sheriff's sale (26 USCA § 154; Jud. Code, § 267 [28 USCA § 384]).-Ralston v. Heiner, 24 F. (2d) 416, affirming judgment (D. C.) 21 F. (2d) 494.

28(3) (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Injunction does not lie to prevent collection of tax barred by limitations (26 USCA § 154).-Peerless Woolen Mills v. Rose, 24 F. (2d) 576.

ices, taxable as income.-Weagant v. Bowers, 24 F.(2d) 362.

38(11) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Statement of claim in suit to recover additional income tax paid must show action was brought within time prescribed by statute.-Warden v. Lederer, 24 F. (2d) 233.

38(11) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) In action to recover estate tax paid under protest, statement, to which was attached notice of rejection from Commissioner of Internal Revenue, showing claim was considered and rejected, held to state sufficient cause of action.-Union Trust Co. of Provision authorizing injunction to restrain Pittsburgh v. McCaughn, 24 F. (2d) 459. collection of tax pending inquiry before Board 38(12) (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Burden was on oleoof Tax Appeals applies only to deficiency tax (Revenue Act 1926, § 274a [26 USCA § 1048]).-Id.

28(3) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Enforcement of jeopardy assessment may not be enjoined (Revenue Act 1926, §§ 274 [a]. 279 [a], being 26 USCA $$ 1018, 1051; 26 USCA § 154).-Salikoff v. McCaughn, 24 F. (2d) 434.

margarine seller, suing for tax paid, to show that product was free from artificial coloration, within statutory proviso imposing smaller tax (Oleomargarine Act 1886, § 8, as amended by Act May 9, 1902, § 3 [26 USCA § 546]).-Foley v. Miller, 24 F. (2d) 722.

m38 (12) (U.S.D.C.Ohio) Evidence held to justify placing cash value of patent license at $20,300, in determining invested capital and depreciation in ascertaining income tax.-Service Recorder Co. v. Routzahn, 24 F. (2d) 875.

36 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Failure to assert, as reason for allowing refund of tax, that collection was barred, held not waiver of such claim, where facts showing bar were alleged (Revenue 45 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Delinquent income tax Act 1918, § 230 Comp. St. § 6336nn]; Revenue Act, 1921, § 250 [d], 42 Stat. 264). Dreyfuss Dry Goods Co. v. Lines, 24 F.(2d) 29, reversing judgment (D. C.) 18 F. (2d) 611.

36 (U.S.C.C.A.La.) Seller of candy held entitled to refund of difference between amount of tax based on total paid by purchaser and that based on net amount received for goods sold (Revenue Act 1918).-Elmer Candy Co. v. Fauntleroy, 24 F. (2d) 95, reversing judgment (D. C.) 19 F. (2d) 664.

36 (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Board of Tax Appeals has authority to make complete audit of tax claims and direct refund of overpayments not made voluntarily (Revenue Act 1926, § 1106 [26 USCA § 1249]).-Peerless Woolen Mills v. Rose, 24 F. (2d) 576.

36 (U.S.D.C.Mass.) Crediting tax refund owed taxpayer against uncollected tax outlawed by limitations held illegal (Revenue Act 1926, § 1106 [26 USCA § 1249]).-Brady v. U. S., 24 F. (2d) 205.

36 (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Commissioner of Internal Revenue may waive defect or informality in application for refund of estate tax.-Union Trust Co. of Pittsburgh v. McCaughn, 24 F. (2d) 459.

38(1) (U.S.D.C.Conn.) Action to recover taxes illegally collected may be on other grounds than specified in refund claim.-Warner v. Walsh, 24 F. (2d) 449.

recover

38(6) (U.S.D.C.Conn.) Action to taxes illegally collected may be brought against collector to whom paid, if living, though out of office (Jud. Code, § 24, par. 20, as amended by Revenue Act 1921, § 1310 [c]; 28 USCA § 41 [20]).-Warner v. Walsh, 24 F. (2d) 449.

38 (7) (U.S.D.C.Conn.) Payment under protest is not condition precedent to action for recovery of tax illegally collected (26 USCA § 156).-Warner v. Walsh, 24 F. (2d) 449.

of

38(7) (U.S.D.C.Kan.) Presentation claim to Board of Tax Appeals is not condition precedent to action to recover overassessment (Revenue Act 1926, § 1113 [26 USCA § 156]).-Elmhurst Inv. Co. v. U. S., 24 F. (2d)

561.

re

38(7) (U.S.D.C.Pa.) Application for fund is condition precedent to action for additional estate tax paid under protest.-Union Trust Co. of Pittsburgh v. McCaughn, 24 F. (2d) 459.

38(9) (U.S.D.C.Ga.) Parties on joint return may properly join in action to recover overassessment of taxes.-Grant v. Rose, 24 F.(2d) 115.

38(11) (U.S.C.C.A.N.Y.) Taxpayer's complaint, amplified by bill of particulars, held at best self-contradictory, and at worst showed that alleged gifts were compensation for serv.

accruing in 1916 held subject to 1 per cent.
monthly interest, regardless of good faith of
abatement claim (Revenue Act 1916, §§ 9 [a],
22 [Comp. St. §§ 63361, 6336u]; 26 USCA §
104; Revenue Act 1918, §§ 250 [e], 1400 [a],
[b], being Comp. St. 88 6336tt, 6371a).-
Carnill v. Lederer, 24 F. (2d) 447.
on which tax
46 (U.S.D.C.La.) Liquor
was unpaid, concealed in barrels on
carrier, held subject to forfeiture (26 USCA
§§ 1181, 1182; National Prohibition Act [27
USCA]).-The Dependent, 24 F. (2d) 538.

common

Vessel engaged as common carrier held not subject to forfeiture for transporting liquor on which tax was unpaid, in absence of owner's intent to defraud government (26 USCA §§ 1181, 1182).-Id.

47 (2) (U.S.C.C.A.Mo.) Indictment for possessing still, distilling spirits, and possession of mash held sufficient, as particularly describing offense (26 USCA §§ 261, 281, 306, 307).-Davis v. U. S., 24 F. (2d) 814.

47(3) (U.S.C.C.A.Cal.) On charge of operating illegal still, under plea of not guilty, government is not required to prove still was not registered nor bond given.-Cardenti v. U. S., 24 F. (2d) 782.

INTERPLEADER.

I. RIGHT TO INTERPLEADER.

6 (U.S.C.C.A.Tenn.) Insurer, paying face of life policy into court, held entitled to require claimants to interplead (28 USCA § 41, par. 26). -Ross v. International Life Ins. Co., 24 F.(2d) 345.

C6 (U.S.D.C.Tex.) Where claimants are bona fide, whether they are beneficiaries or not, and company deposits amount of insurance policy in registry of court, interpleader may be filed as provided by statute (28 USCA § 41, par. [26]).-Kansas City Life Ins. Co. v. Adamson, 24 F. (2d) 107.

INTOXICATING LIQUORS.

IV. LICENSES AND TAXES.

106(2) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Inability to account for bills of lading for export shipments covered by canceled invoices on file held not to authorize revocation of permit to withdraw whisky.-D. P. Paul & Co. v. Mellon, 24 F. (2d) 738.

Mere absence of papers from files, or of notations of cancellation on every invoice is not ground for revoking permit to withdraw whisky for manufacturing purposes.-Id.

106(4) (U.S.D.C.N.Y.) Belief that purchasers were diverting denatured alcohol in products sold held not to warrant revocation of sell