Auerbach v. Commissioner
2 B.T.A. 67, 1925 BTA LEXIS 2561
United States Board of Tax Appeals·Decided June 15, 1925·No. Docket No. 1976.·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
[69]*69OPINION.
The expense of putting new roof on building and repair
of boilers was of a permanent nature, and hence constituted a capital expenditure and should be allowed as such.
The items of repairing gutters on building, repairing concrete around building, and decorating and painting, being temporary and of frequent recurrence, were, as well as the items of janitor service, water, • coal, interest, and premium on fire insurance, current necessary expense.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Auerbach v. Commissioner, 2 B.T.A. 67, 1925 BTA LEXIS 2561 (bta 1925).
2 B.T.A. 67 (Auerbach v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Jackson v. Commissioner
1954 T.C. Memo. 235 (U.S. Tax Court, 1954)
Jephson v. Commissioner
37 B.T.A. 1117 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1938)