Commissioner v. Rainier Brewing Co.

Petitioner for rehearing asserts that the rule established in Dobson v. Commissioner, 320 U.S. 489, 502 , 64 S.Ct. 239 , 88 L.Ed. 248 ; Bingham’s Trust v. Commissioner, 325 U.S. 365, 370 , 65 S.Ct. 1232 , 89 L.Ed. 1670 , 163 A.L.R. 1175 and Choate v. Commissioner, 324 U.S. 1 , 65 S.Ct. 469 , 89 L.Ed. 653 , does not apply because the probative facts relied upon by the Tax Court are undisputed. We do not agree.

In Boehm v. Commissioner, 326 U.S. 287, 293 , 66 S.Ct. 120, 124 , 90 L.Ed. 78 , 166 A.L.R. 708 , a case of undisputed facts, the Supreme Court states “The circumstance that the facts in a particular case may be stipulated or undisputed does not make this issue any less factual in nature. The Tax Court is entitled to draw whatever inferences ' and conclusions it deems reasonable from such facts. And an appellate court is limited, under familiar doctrines, to a consideration of whether the decision of the Tax Court is ‘in accordance with law.’ 26 U.S.C. § 1141 (c) (1), 26 U.S.C.A.Int.Rev. Code, § 1141(c) (1). If it is in accordance, it is immaterial that different inferences and conclusions might fairly be drawn from the undisputed facts. Commissioner v. Scottish American Inv.…