Fontius Shoe Co. v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Fontius Shoe Co. v. Commissioner

7 B.T.A. 1098, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3009

United States Board of Tax Appeals·Decided August 22, 1927·No. Docket No. 9944.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[1099] OPINION.

Van Fossan:

Petitioner is entitled to an allowance for depreciation based on the depreciated cost of furniture and fixtures above found, less salvage value, and prorated over the remaining term of the lease. See Appeal of H. Citrin, 2 B. T. A. 626; Appeal of Kunkel & Co., 3 B. T. A. 133.

Judgment will be entered on IS days’ notice, under Buie SO.

Considered by Maiíqtjltte, Milliken, and Phillips.

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

[1099] OPINION.

Van Fossan:

Petitioner is entitled to an allowance for depreciation based on the depreciated cost of furniture and fixtures above found, less salvage value, and prorated over the remaining term of the lease. See Appeal of H. Citrin, 2 B. T. A. 626; Appeal of Kunkel & Co., 3 B. T. A. 133.

Judgment will be entered on IS days’ notice, under Buie SO.

Considered by Maiíqtjltte, Milliken, and Phillips.

Fontius Shoe Co. v. Commissioner, 7 B.T.A. 1098, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3009 (bta 1927).

Pincite

7 B.T.A. 1098 (Fontius Shoe Co. v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related