Cremin v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Cremin v. Commissioner

5 B.T.A. 1169, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3664

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedJanuary 25, 1927

DocketDocket No. 9198.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 B.T.A. 1169 (Cremin v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Board of Tax Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cremin v. Commissioner, 5 B.T.A. 1169, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3664 (bta 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

[1170]*1170OPINION.

Marquette:

The facts in this proceeding are identical with those in E. F. Cremin v. Commissioner, 5 B. T. A. 1164, decided this day, except in that proceeding there was also involved the question of the amounts of deductions for depreciation of oil-well drilling equipment that should be allowed to certain partnerships of which E. F. Cremin was a member. Upon the authority of our decision in E. F. Cremin v. Commissioner, we hold (1) that we have no jurisdiction of this proceeding in so far as it relates to the petitioner’s tax liability for the year 1919; (2) that the amount of $10,000 paid to the petitioner on January 1, 1920, by the Eastern Torpedo Co., as salary for the year 1919, was income to him for the year 1920; and (3) that the amount included in the petitioner’s income for the year 1920, as liquidating dividends received from the Eastern Torpedo Co., should be reduced by the amount of income and profits taxes that were subsequently paid by him for the company.

Judgment will be entered on 15 days' notice, under Bule 50.

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

[1170]*1170OPINION.

Marquette:

The facts in this proceeding are identical with those in E. F. Cremin v. Commissioner, 5 B. T. A. 1164, decided this day, except in that proceeding there was also involved the question of the amounts of deductions for depreciation of oil-well drilling equipment that should be allowed to certain partnerships of which E. F. Cremin was a member. Upon the authority of our decision in E. F. Cremin v. Commissioner, we hold (1) that we have no jurisdiction of this proceeding in so far as it relates to the petitioner’s tax liability for the year 1919; (2) that the amount of $10,000 paid to the petitioner on January 1, 1920, by the Eastern Torpedo Co., as salary for the year 1919, was income to him for the year 1920; and (3) that the amount included in the petitioner’s income for the year 1920, as liquidating dividends received from the Eastern Torpedo Co., should be reduced by the amount of income and profits taxes that were subsequently paid by him for the company.

Judgment will be entered on 15 days' notice, under Bule 50.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 B.T.A. 1169, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3664, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cremin-v-commissioner-bta-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack