Grafton Stave & Heading Co. v. Commissioner

7 B.T.A. 1045, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3047
CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals
DecidedAugust 8, 1927
DocketDocket No. 12879.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 B.T.A. 1045 (Grafton Stave & Heading Co. 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
Grafton Stave & Heading Co. v. Commissioner, 7 B.T.A. 1045, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3047 (bta 1927).

Opinion

[1047]*1047OPINION.

Lansdon :

At the hearing of this proceeding, counsel for the respondent admitted that the petitioner’s opening inventory for 1920 had been improperly reduced by the amount of $9,355.21. As this point is conceded by the respondent, it requires no further consideration.

The evidence adduced in support of the petitioner’s claim for a deduction from gross income in 1920 in the amount of $8,435.14, is indefinite and inadequate. The manufacture of headings was discontinued in November, 1919. Some of the machinery was sold during the taxable year and later years for amounts equal to its original cost to the petitioner. The Corliss engine was protected from the weather and remained in the possession of the petitioner. No evidence was introduced as to the depreciated or unrecovered cost on December 31,1920, of the dry kiln, shed, trestle track, Corliss engine, or any other assets forming the basis of the claimed deduction. The schedule of costs of additions and improvements set forth in the findings of fact obviously applies to the entire plant, including the stave mill as well as the heading mill. From the record, we are unable to ascertain how the petitioner arrived at its [1048]*1048claimed deduction for so-called obsolescence in the amount of $8,435.14. We are of the opinion that the petitioner has not established his claim to a deduction from gross income in 1920 because of the dismantling of its heading mill and equipment. See Marigold Garden Co., 6 B. T. A. 368.

Judgment vnll be entered on 15 days’ notice, under Rule 50.

Considered by Stiornhagen, Green, and Arundell.

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

Related

Grafton Stave & Heading Co. v. Commissioner
7 B.T.A. 1045 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 B.T.A. 1045, 1927 BTA LEXIS 3047, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grafton-stave-heading-co-v-commissioner-bta-1927.