*181 Decision will be entered that there was an overpayment of excess profits tax for the year 1943 in the amount of $ 62,444.55. No deficiency was determined in income tax, and, for lack of jurisdiction, no decision will be entered with respect to income tax.
In 1935 petitioner acquired from its predecessor corporation certain assets through a bankruptcy proceeding, within section 121 of the Revenue Act of 1943. Held, that in computing unused excess profits credits for 1941 and 1942, to be carried forward and used in computing its 1943 tax, the petitioner properly used its predecessor's basis, as provided in section 121, Revenue Act of 1943.
*894 OPINION.
This case involves a deficiency in excess profits tax for the year 1943 in the amount of $ 114,176.94, with a resulting overassessment in income tax in the amount of $ 30,686.02, and a claim for refund of excess profits tax for 1943, the amount dependent upon the conclusion reached in this case. The issue is whether petitioner is entitled to unused excess profits credit carry-overs from the years 1941 and 1942, with a resulting unused excess profits credit adjustment for*183 1943 in the amount of $ 196,246.09.
The parties have stipulated all of the facts, reading (except statement of the issue stipulated as above set forth) as follows:
Petitioner is a corporation, with its principal place of business in Fort Worth, Texas.
As of January 1, 1935, petitioner acquired from its predecessor corporation all of the assets of such predecessor corporation, in pursuance of an order of the Federal court having jurisdiction over the matter in a proceeding under section 77B of the National Bankruptcy Act, petitioner having been organized to effectuate a plan of reorganization approved by said court in such proceeding, said assets being acquired in exchange solely for stock or securities of petitioner. Petitioner's average equity invested capital for the year 1943, determined in accordance with its predecessor's basis in such assets, is $ 8,278,760.21, and its invested capital for such year is $ 11,854,976.65. For the year 1941, petitioner's average equity invested capital, determined in accordance with its predecessor's basis, is $ 8,278,760.21, and its invested capital for 1941 so determined is $ 11,734,151.02. Similarly, for 1942, petitioner's average equity invested*184 capital, determined in accordance with the predecessor's basis, is $ 8,278,760.21, and its invested capital so determined is $ 11,873,052.14. Petitioner's excess profits credit for 1941 and 1942, determined on the basis of an invested capital of $ 11,734,151.02 and $ 11,873,052.14, respectively for such years is $ 854,049.06 and $ 862,383.13. Its excess profits net income for the years 1941 and 1942, determined in accordance with its predecessor's basis, is respectively $ 772,338.41 and $ 747,847.69. Petitioner's unused excess profits credit for the years 1941 and 1942, determined on the basis of an invested capital of $ 11,734,151.02 and $ 11,873,052.14, respectively *895 for such years is $ 81,710.65 and $ 114,535.44, or a total unused excess profits credit carry-over from 1941 and 1942 and a resulting unused excess profits credit adjustment for 1943 in the amount of $ 196,246.09.
It is petitioner's position in this proceeding that under the provisions of sections 112 (b) (10), 113 (a) (22) and other applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, it is entitled to have its unused excess profits credit carry-over from the years 1941 and 1942 and a resulting unused excess*185 profits credit adjustment for the year 1943 computed in accordance with the basis of its predecessor corporation in the assets acquired by petitioner from such predecessor on January 1, 1935. It is respondent's position in this proceeding that petitioner is not entitled to any unused excess profits credit carry-over from the years 1941 and 1942 to 1943, by reason of the provisions of sections 112 (b) (10), 113 (a) (22), and other applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. If petitioner is correct in its position, it is agreed that petitioner is entitled to an unused excess profits credit adjustment for the year 1943 in the amount of $ 196,246.09. If respondent is correct in his position in this proceeding, petitioner is not entitled to any unused excess profits credit adjustment for the year 1943. If petitioner is correct in its position, it is agreed that there should be a determination of a deficiency in income tax for the year 1943 of $ 47,812.42 and an overassessment in excess profits tax for the year 1943 of $ 62,444.55, exclusive of post war refund of $ 2,882.63. It is agreed that said overassessment is not barred by the statute of limitations. If respondent is*186 correct in his position, it is agreed that the determination made in the statutory notice of a deficiency in excess profits tax for the year 1943 in the amount of $ 114,176.94, and an overassessment in income tax for such year in the amount of $ 30,686.02, is correct. We find the facts as agreed above.
The question for our determination is whether petitioner is entitled to have its unused excess profits credit adjustment for 1943 computed in accordance with the basis of its predecessor corporation for the assets acquired from such predecessor on January 1, 1935, under the provisions of section 121 of the Revenue Act of 1943. That section provides, in general, for the use by a successor corporation of the basis of its predecessor corporation if the successor acquired title through bankruptcy proceedings (as is agreed was the case here); and subsection (e) provides that such provisions "* * * shall be deemed to be included in the revenue laws respectively applicable to the taxable years beginning after December 31, 1933." The subsection, however, proceeds: "but shall not affect any tax liability for any taxable year beginning prior to January 1, 1943." (Italics supplied.) The *187 petitioner's point here, therefore, is that to compute its unused excess profits tax credit for 1941 and 1942 by use of its predecessor's *896 basis, as permitted by section 121 of the 1943 Act, and, under
The petitioner may not, the respondent argues, construct hypothetical unused excess profits credits for 1941 and 1942 to use in 1943, but says that the statutory scheme was to give the taxpayer benefit, by way of a carry-over, of that credit which was actually available*189 to it in the earlier year.
The question is new, as the parties agree. Neither suggests any case as bearing directly upon it. The petitioner, however, cites, by way of analogy,
We conclude and hold that petitioner did not err in computing for 1943 its unused excess profits credits, carried over from 1941 and 1942, on the new basis provided by section 121 of the Revenue Act of 1943. Therefore, in accord with the stipulation of the parties,
Decision will be entered that there was an overpayment of excess profits tax for the year 1943 in the amount of $ 62,444.55. No deficiency was determined in income tax, and, for lack of jurisdiction, no decision will be entered with *193 respect to income tax.
Black, J., dissenting: I am unable to agree with the conclusion reached in the majority opinion wherein it holds that petitioner, in computing unused excess profits credits for 1941 and 1942 to be carried forward and used in computing its 1943 excess profits tax, is entitled to reconstruct excess profits credits for 1941 and 1942 by using its predecessor's basis as provided in section 121, Revenue Act of 1943. Section 121 of the Revenue Act of 1943 relates generally to the "Reorganization of Certain Insolvent Corporations" and contains numerous provisions.
The majority opinion states respondent's position, in part, as follows:
The petitioner may not, the respondent argues, construct hypothetical unused excess profits credits for 1941 and 1942 to use in 1943, but says that the statutory scheme was to give the taxpayer benefit, by way of a carry-over, of that credit which was actually available to it in the earlier year.
I agree with respondent. Where does the petitioner get the right to use in 1943 unused excess profits credit carry-overs from 1941 and 1942? It gets it from
(2) Definition of unused excess profits credit. -- The term "unused excess profits credit" means the excess, if any, of the excess profits credit for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1939, over the excess profits net income for such taxable year, computed on the basis of the excess profits credit applicable to such taxable year. * * * [Italics supplied.]
It seems to me that what petitioner wants to do in the instant case is to recompute its excess profits credit on a basis which was not applicable *899 when it filed its excess profits tax returns for 1941 and 1942 and relies upon section 121 of the Revenue Act of 1943 as justification for this action. The majority opinion approves. I do not think the enactment of section 121 had any such purpose in mind, nor do I think it has that effect. As I have already stated, section 121 of the Revenue Act of 1943 relates generally to the reorganization of certain insolvent corporations. The Senate Finance Committee Report, No. 627, Dec. 22, 1943, to accompany H. R. 3687, says of this section (then section 115, later section 121 in the conference report), *195 among other things, as follows:
This section, for which there is no corresponding section in the House bill, amends existing law to provide equality of tax treatment for all corporations undergoing insolvency reorganization under court supervision. The tax treatment provided includes the rules with respect to gain or loss and basis of assets which shall be used both for the determination of depreciation and gain or loss on subsequent sale, and for the determination of credit for excess profits tax purposes. * * * [Italics supplied.]
It is true, of course, that under section 121 the petitioner has a right to use its predecessor's basis in determining its excess profits credit for 1943. That was one of its purposes. The Commissioner does not dispute that fact and has, as I understand it, computed petitioner's excess profits credit for 1943 by the allowance of its predecessor's basis. But he does dispute the right of petitioner to compute a hypothetical excess profits credit carry-over for each of the years 1941 and 1942 and substitute this hypothetical carry-over for the actual carry-over which petitioner did have in those years and bring forward this hypothetical excess profits*196 carry-over and use it as a credit in 1943. I do not think the provisions contained in section 121 (e) of the 1943 Act making changes in basis "applicable to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1933," warrant any such result.
I think the provisions upon which the majority opinion relies in support of its conclusion reached were intended, as the Senate Finance Committee Report says: "The tax treatment provided includes the rules with respect to gain or loss and basis of assets which shall be used both for the determination of depreciation and gain or loss on subsequent sale, and for the determination of credit or excess profits tax purposes." The provisions in question mean, I think, that, regardless of when the property was acquired from a predecessor, if it was acquired subsequent to 1933 the provisions of section 121 apply for the purpose of determining gain or loss on the sale or exchange of such property or for depreciation or for the determination of excess profits tax purposes in years beginning with January 1, 1943.
But as I have already stated, I do not think these provisions have any effect to change the provisions of