Summary

George Sutherland Minnesota Tea Company v. Helvering…

The conclusion is inescapable, as the court below very clearly pointed out, that by this roundabout process petitioner received the same benefit 'as though it had retained that amount from distribution and applied it to the payment of such indebtedness.' Payment of indebtedness, and not distribution of dividends, was, from the beginning, the aim of the understanding with the stockholders and was the end accomplished by carrying that understanding into effect. A given result at the end of a straight path is not made a different result because reached by following a devious path.
Source: Wikisource

George Sutherland Minnesota Tea Company v. Helvering…

If the corporation receiving such other property or money does not distribute it in pursuance of the plan of reorganization, the gain, if any, to the corporation shall be recognized, but in an amount not in excess of the sum of such money and the fair market value of such other property so received, which is not so distributed.'
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105) .
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature