Summary

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart United Ates v. Skelly Oil Company…

But the very purpose of the annual accounting concept is to preclude adjustments in the amount of the deduction to reflect the tax consequences of the item's inclusion in the prior year.
'Congress has enacted an annual accounting system under which income is counted up at the end of each year. It would be disruptive of an orderly collection of the revenue to rule that the accounting must be done over again to reflect events occurring after the year for which the accounting is made, and would violate the spirit of the annual accounting system.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart United Ates v. Skelly Oil Company…

In purpose and effect the deductions are wholly unrelated, and each is sustainable on its own merits. Certainly it cannot be said either that the respondent did not in fact exhaust the capital assets for which the deductions were allowed in 1952 through 1957 or that it did not suffer a business loss by the 1958 repayment.
The sole nexus between these distinct transactions on which the Court constructs its 'double deduction' theory is that the depletion deductions were computed as a percentage of gross income from the property.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Potter Stewart Potter Stewart United Ates v. Skelly Oil Company…

Section 1341 retains those principles where they benefit the taxpayer but allow recomputation of the taxes of a prior year if that method would result in a greater tax saving.↑ Judicial assumptions that Congress did not intend liberal benefits for taxpayers are particularly suspect in the area of percentage depletion, perhaps the most generous business deduction in the Code. And Congress had the recipients of percentage depletion specifically in mind when it drafted § 1341.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature