Bank of Rockingham v. Commissioner

3 B.T.A. 1137, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2468
United States Board of Tax Appeals·Decided April 1, 1926·No. Docket No. 4682.·Published

Opinion

[1138] FINDINGS OP FACT.

The taxpayer is a North Carolina corporation engaged in th< commercial and savings bank business at Rockingham. Its books of account were kept on the basis of cash receipts and disbursements

During the year 1920 the taxpayer discounted certain notes witl accrued interest, the discount upon which amounted to $4,642. Nc part of the said notes was paid during the taxable year 1920.

The Commissioner has included in gross income the said sum oi $4,642 as income to the taxpayer in the year 1920.

The discount in the amount of $1¡.,61¡.2 should be excluded frorr, gross income of the year 1920, and the tax computed accordingly Appeal of Chatham <& Phenix National Bank, 1 B. T. A. ⅛60, Appedl of Bank of Eartsville, 1 B. T. A. 920. Order of redetermination will be entered on 10 days' notice, under Rule 50.

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

Bank of Rockingham v. Commissioner, 3 B.T.A. 1137, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2468 (bta 1926).

3 B.T.A. 1137 (Bank of Rockingham v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chatham & Phenix Nat'l Bank v. Commissioner
1 B.T.A. 460 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1925)
Bank of Hartsville v. Commissioner
1 B.T.A. 920 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1925)
Appeal of Bank of Rockingham
3 B.T.A. 1137 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1926)