Ann Edwards Trust v. Commissioner
This text of 20 T.C. 615 (Ann Edwards Trust v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION.
The issue common to the four petitioners is whether the gain from the sale of the fruit on the trees at the time they sold their respective citrus groves was ordinary income, the fruit at the time of the sale not being mature and not, therefore, ready to be harvested.
This question has been recently decided by the Supreme Court, in Watson v. Commissioner, 345 U. S. 544, affirming 197 F. 2d 56 and 15 T. C. 800. It was held that on the sale of an orange grove with immature fruit on the trees, such part of the gain realized as was attributable to the crop was ordinary income because realized on the sale of property held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of business. That decision controls this issue, and the respondent is sustained.
The other issue relates only to the trust petitioners, who contend that they may return such ordinary income on the installment basis under section 44 of the Internal Revenue Code.2
On this issue, we think that the petitioners have met the requirements of the statute. If the fruit be regarded as personal property, the facts show that the sales in question were casual sales and not sales in the ordinary course of the petitioners’ trade or business, even though the fruit on the trees at the time of the sale was held primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of such trade or business. Furthermore, there can be no question, we think, that a growing crop of citrus fruit would not be “property of a kind which would properly be included in the inventory of the taxpayer if on hand at the close of the taxable year.” If, on the other hand, the growing crop was realty, the statute carries no conditions or limitations on the right of a taxpayer to report its gain under section 44 (b), other than the limitations as to the amounts and times of the payments, and as to those conditions there is no argument that they have not been met. On this issue we accordingly hold for the petitioners.
Decisions will be entered wider Rule 50.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
20 T.C. 615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ann-edwards-trust-v-commissioner-tax-1953.