Rev. Rul. 56-538

In Nathan Gellman, et al. v. United States , 235 Fed.(2d) 87, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, reversed a decision of the United States District Court, Minnesota, 129 Fed.Supp. 291, which had sustained the position of the Government that, in applying the retailers excise taxes imposed by sections 1651 and 2400 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, the term `sold at retail' is equivalent to `sale for purposes other than resale.' Although the case did not present adequate grounds for review by the Supreme Court of the United States, the decision of the Court of Appeals will not be considered by the Internal Revenue Service as a precedent in the disposition of other cases involving a similar factual situation. This will apply whether the situation arises under the above sections of the 1939 Code or under the similar provisions of sections 4001 and 4031 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.