Ardis & Co. v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Ardis & Co. v. Commissioner

12 B.T.A. 679, 1928 BTA LEXIS 3482

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedJune 18, 1928

DocketDocket No. 13023;

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 12 B.T.A. 679 (Ardis & Co. v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ardis & Co. v. Commissioner, 12 B.T.A. 679, 1928 BTA LEXIS 3482 (bta 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

[681]*681OPINION.

Arundell:

The evidence shows that at December 31, 1920, the maker of the notes was without resources of any kind out of which the amount charged off could have been collected and that he had financial obligations to meet aside from what he owed under the two mortgages on the farm. The value of the land was less than the amount of the first mortgage and it would have been a useless procedure for the petitioner to have instituted foreclosure proceedings under the second mortgage it held as security for the payment of the notes. The petitioner through its business relations with the debtor was fully aware of his insolvent financial condition and knew of no assets out of which judgment for the amount due could have been collected. The treasurer of the petitioner corporation testified that before the notes were charged off as worthless, the petitioner made every effort to collect them but without success. Nothing was paid on the notes prior to December 31, 1920, and no payments have been paid on them since then.

From all the evidence, it is our opinion that the notes were worthless at the time they were charged off as bad debts. The deduction was proper and the respondent is reversed.

Judgment mil be entered under Rule 50.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[681]*681OPINION.

Arundell:

The evidence shows that at December 31, 1920, the maker of the notes was without resources of any kind out of which the amount charged off could have been collected and that he had financial obligations to meet aside from what he owed under the two mortgages on the farm. The value of the land was less than the amount of the first mortgage and it would have been a useless procedure for the petitioner to have instituted foreclosure proceedings under the second mortgage it held as security for the payment of the notes. The petitioner through its business relations with the debtor was fully aware of his insolvent financial condition and knew of no assets out of which judgment for the amount due could have been collected. The treasurer of the petitioner corporation testified that before the notes were charged off as worthless, the petitioner made every effort to collect them but without success. Nothing was paid on the notes prior to December 31, 1920, and no payments have been paid on them since then.

From all the evidence, it is our opinion that the notes were worthless at the time they were charged off as bad debts. The deduction was proper and the respondent is reversed.

Judgment mil be entered under Rule 50.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 B.T.A. 679, 1928 BTA LEXIS 3482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ardis-co-v-commissioner-bta-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack