Byrnes v. Commissioner

Third Circuit

Byrnes v. Commissioner

128 F.2d 616, 29 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 681, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 3655

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedApril 27, 1942

DocketNo. 7748

StatusPublished

This text of 128 F.2d 616 (Byrnes v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Byrnes v. Commissioner, 128 F.2d 616, 29 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 681, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 3655 (3d Cir. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In his petition for review the taxpayer raises two questions, (1) as to his right to a deduction for expenses, incurred in 1935 and 1936, which he claims were ordinary and necessary in carrying on his trade or business, and (2) his right to a deduction for loss on stock which he asserts was determined by the dissolution of the issuing corporation in 1936. Upon sufficient evidence, the Board of Tax Appeals found the facts as to both matters against the petitioner and applied thereto the pertinent law. We have no reason either to interfere with the Board’s findings or to disapprove of its ' application of the law to the facts found.

The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.

CLARK, Circuit Judge, took no part in the decision of this case.

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

PER CURIAM.

In his petition for review the taxpayer raises two questions, (1) as to his right to a deduction for expenses, incurred in 1935 and 1936, which he claims were ordinary and necessary in carrying on his trade or business, and (2) his right to a deduction for loss on stock which he asserts was determined by the dissolution of the issuing corporation in 1936. Upon sufficient evidence, the Board of Tax Appeals found the facts as to both matters against the petitioner and applied thereto the pertinent law. We have no reason either to interfere with the Board’s findings or to disapprove of its ' application of the law to the facts found.

The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is, therefore, affirmed.

CLARK, Circuit Judge, took no part in the decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 F.2d 616, 29 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 681, 1942 U.S. App. LEXIS 3655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/byrnes-v-commissioner-ca3-1942.