Riddell

This matter regularly came on for trial before the Honorable Ben Harrison, United States District Judge, presiding without a jury. The plaintiff and defendant in intervention having abandoned the first cause of action in its complaint and the first affirmative defense in its answer to the complaint in intervention, and having elected to go to trial only on the issue of whether or not defendant and plaintiff in intervention were estopped from collecting manufacturer’s excise taxes from plaintiff and defendant in intervention by reason of the latter’s alleged reliance on consistent administrative practice, if any, not to collect such taxes prior to August 18, 1952, and the Court having considered the evidence, both oral and documentary, the stipula *837 tions of fact and the arguments of counsel, the Court makes its findings of fact and conclusions of law as follows:

Findings of Fact

I

This is an action for refund of manufacturer’s excise taxes paid pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 3403 (Int.Rev.Code of 1939) for the period from October 1, 1950, through August 18, 1952, in which the United States intervened to recover unpaid manufacturer’s excise taxes for the same period.

II

The…