Levin v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Levin v. Commissioner

5 B.T.A. 892, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2752

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedDecember 21, 1926

DocketDocket No. 6444.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 B.T.A. 892 (Levin 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

Levin v. Commissioner, 5 B.T.A. 892, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2752 (bta 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

[893]*893OPINION.

Lansdon:

The evidence is conclusive that the petitioner was entitled, subject to the limitations of section 214(a) (11) (B) of the Eevenue Act of 1921, to deduct the amount of $1,000 from his gross income in his income-tax return for the year 1922 as a contribution to a religious organization, and that he is entitled to a deduction of $160 to cover depreciation of buildings in addition to the amount of $140 originally claimed under the erroneous title of loss on property. We are unable to determine from the evidence that the amounts which the petitioner remitted to Poland, as contributions to the support of the five orphan children of his brother, constituted the chief support of such children, or whether the entire amounts so remitted were used for the purposes alleged. We therefore disallow his claim for exemption on account of five additional dependents.

Judgment will he entered on 20 days’ notice, under Rule 50.

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

[893]*893OPINION.

Lansdon:

The evidence is conclusive that the petitioner was entitled, subject to the limitations of section 214(a) (11) (B) of the Eevenue Act of 1921, to deduct the amount of $1,000 from his gross income in his income-tax return for the year 1922 as a contribution to a religious organization, and that he is entitled to a deduction of $160 to cover depreciation of buildings in addition to the amount of $140 originally claimed under the erroneous title of loss on property. We are unable to determine from the evidence that the amounts which the petitioner remitted to Poland, as contributions to the support of the five orphan children of his brother, constituted the chief support of such children, or whether the entire amounts so remitted were used for the purposes alleged. We therefore disallow his claim for exemption on account of five additional dependents.

Judgment will he entered on 20 days’ notice, under Rule 50.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 B.T.A. 892, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2752, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levin-v-commissioner-bta-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack