
    GIRARD TRUST CO., GEORGE STEVENSON, WILLIAM R. VERNER, ET AL., v. UNITED STATES
    [59 C. Cls. 727; 270 U. S. 163]
    Judgment was rendered in favor of the United States in the court below. On appeal the judgment was reversed, the Supreme Court deciding:
    1. Where interest on tax refunds is allowed by statute, a suit for the interest after refund of a tax is maintainable in the Court of Claims. Stewart v. Barnes, 153 U. S. 456, distinguished.
    2. Under section 1324 (a) of the revenue act of November 23, 1921, which provides that, upon the allowance of a claim for the refund of internal-revenue taxes paid, interest shall be allowed and paid upon the total amount of such refund “ to the date of such allowance,” the date to which the interest runs is neither the date of actual repayment nor the date on which the Commissioner of Internal Revenue first decides that there has been an overassessment and refers the matter to the collector for examination and report of the amounts to be refunded, but the date on which the commissioner approves the amount thus ascertained for payment.
    3. The above section dates the interest (a) from the time when the tax was paid, if it was paid “ under a specific protest setting forth in detail the basis of and reasons for such protest,” but (b) from six months after the date of filing claim for refund, if there was no protest or payment pursuant to additional assessment. Helé, that in order to date the interest from time of payment of tax the protest under which it was paid must set forth a specific and valid reason for a refund.
    4. Where a tax payment was less than the amount illegally assessed, due to deduction of the discount allowed on anticipatory payments by section 1009 of the revenue act of October 3, 1917, the amount refundable, with interest, was the amount actually paid, not including the discount.
   Mr. Chief Justice Taft

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court March 1, 1926.  