Bachman v. Commissioner

21 B.T.A. 36, 1930 BTA LEXIS 1940
United States Board of Tax Appeals·Decided October 14, 1930·No. Docket No. 40008.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[38] OPINION.

MtjRdoch :

The petitioner seeks to deduct the $5,000 from his gross income for the year 1924. The respondent now takes the position that the deduction should be prorated over the term of the twenty-year lease. Counsel for the petitioner relies principally upon the case of Robert E. McNeill, 16 B. T. A. 479, but that case has since been overruled. See James M. Butler, 19 B. T. A. 718. The petitioner has failed to show that he is entitled to any greater deduction than the respondent is willing to give him by prorating the $5,000 over the term of the lease. Cf. Julia Stow Lovejoy, 18 B. T. A. 1179; Bonwit Teller & Co., 17 B. T. A. 1019; Roby Realty Co., 19 B. T. A. 696; James M. Butler, supra; Evalena M. Howard et al., 19 B. T. A. 865; Central Bank Block Association, 19 B. T. A. 1183; S. M. Clawson, 19 B. T. A. 1253.

Judgment will be entered for the resyondent and the deficiencies will be fownd in accordance with the stipulation.

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

Bachman v. Commissioner, 21 B.T.A. 36, 1930 BTA LEXIS 1940 (bta 1930).

21 B.T.A. 36 (Bachman v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bachman v. Commissioner
21 B.T.A. 36 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1930)