Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Hoffman

Second Circuit

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Hoffman

117 F.2d 987, 26 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 486, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4393

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 3, 1941

Docket89

StatusPublished

Cited by27 cases

This text of 117 F.2d 987 (Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Hoffman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Hoffman, 117 F.2d 987, 26 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 486, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4393 (2d Cir. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The commissioner seeks reversal of a decision of the Board holding that under section 23(e) (2) of the Revenue Act of 1934, 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, § 23(e) (2), the taxpayers were entitled to deduct from gross income a loss sustained in 1934, when the interest in improved real estate owned by them subject to a mortgage upon which they had not assumed liability, became worthless and they abandoned their interest and so advised the mortgagee, although title remained in them until completion of foreclosure proceedings in the following year. 40 B.T.A. 459. Upon amply sufficient evidence the Board found specifically that the taxpayers’ interest in the property became worthless in 1934. We see no valid ground to differentiate between a loss suffered on real estate and one on personalty, if worthlessness is definitely established. Compare Wieboldt v. Commissioner, 7 Cir., 113 F.2d 384, 386.

On the authority of Denman v. Brum-back, 6 Cir., 58 F.2d 128, 129 and Rhodes v. Commissioner, 6 Cir., 100 F.2d 966, the Board’s decision is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The commissioner seeks reversal of a decision of the Board holding that under section 23(e) (2) of the Revenue Act of 1934, 26 U.S.C.A. Int.Rev.Code, § 23(e) (2), the taxpayers were entitled to deduct from gross income a loss sustained in 1934, when the interest in improved real estate owned by them subject to a mortgage upon which they had not assumed liability, became worthless and they abandoned their interest and so advised the mortgagee, although title remained in them until completion of foreclosure proceedings in the following year. 40 B.T.A. 459. Upon amply sufficient evidence the Board found specifically that the taxpayers’ interest in the property became worthless in 1934. We see no valid ground to differentiate between a loss suffered on real estate and one on personalty, if worthlessness is definitely established. Compare Wieboldt v. Commissioner, 7 Cir., 113 F.2d 384, 386.

On the authority of Denman v. Brum-back, 6 Cir., 58 F.2d 128, 129 and Rhodes v. Commissioner, 6 Cir., 100 F.2d 966, the Board’s decision is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 F.2d 987, 26 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 486, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 4393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commissioner-of-internal-revenue-v-hoffman-ca2-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack