Akron Rubber Mould & Machine Co. v. Commissioner
Opinion of the Court
The question here for decision is whether the petitioner is entitled to have its tax determined as provided in section 328 of the Revenue Act of 1918.
It also appears that the petitioner made additions to its plant, built machines and installed other machines which it had bought from outside sources and expended considerable sums in installing them and also in installing other equipment and machines, no part of which expenditures was capitalized, and on account of the methods of bookkeeping followed such expenditures could not be segregated from other expenditures with a sufficient degree of accuracy to permit any specific amount with respect thereto to be included in invested capital.
We think that on account of the above-mentioned facts and circumstances the invested capital of the petitioner can not be determined under the provisions of section 326 of the Revenue Act of 1918, and that the petitioner comes within the meaning of section 327 (a) of the Revenue Act of 1918, and is entitled to have its tax assessed under the provisions of section 328. Further proceedings will therefore be had under the provisions of Rule 62 (c) and the case will be restored to the calendar for further proceedings in due course.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.