“company's payment, own is but only beoks, tical dividend, and for the any evidenced by evidence assets it not by book entry again when it has independent business the company identical ment, ant no with of claims a management & tax reach unsupported payment its to acknowledgment of in companyts the parent parent debt and or iden. rather officers, for its affairs needed no manace~ when, from its organization, shortly after law enures, ita ¢hat law and se only effeetiveness is advantage its product to in open market, we think the court is compelled to it a sham and the parent corporation the proper payer. overthe hold tax- "Cases calling for judicial disrezard of an alleged Corporate entity must each of them stand on its own legs and pouthern we think the facts Pacifie Company v. here make Lowe, 247 this such U, S, 320 s case, (8 ALF.T.R. £969), This is so even though it be the law thet @ taxpayer may use any legal method to eseape & tax, A snem method is not a legal methad,* Webster's Edition, defines counterfeit mere purporting out in its quotation a mere "front", ducting @ } a substitute, to ve the holding the thet without manufacturing imitation in means the manufacturer. justify or that there contention thet The set facts this conelusion, the new substence, business, Second thine, court substence amply a form real ofthe demonstrates but The corroration was not cone merely in fact pretending to and in instent “ 80. clearly - a show a 4 ry out set facts The: this be was opinion Dietionary, to withont Ine,, avove Go the pretense Laboratories, International "sham" inus, Was New the Bon contrary am ye, +s in original owr to be x’ true 4 te ait ve in brief the wher 1 ; kh ~ ease, % es