Lewis v. Commissioner

1962 T.C. Memo. 306, 21 T.C.M. 1647, 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 3
United States Tax Court·Decided December 31, 1962·No. Docket Nos. 83732, 83733, 85162, 85749, 85750, 91963, 94018, 94019.·Unpublished·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Louis H. Lewis and Annette Lewis, et al. 1 v. Commissioner.
Lewis v. Commissioner
Docket Nos. 83732, 83733, 85162, 85749, 85750, 91963, 94018, 94019.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1962-306; 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 3; 21 T.C.M. (CCH) 1647; T.C.M. (RIA) 62306;
December 31, 1962
William P. Rosenthal, Esq., 110 S. Dearborn St., Chicago, Ill., for the petitioners. Seymour I. Sherman, Esq., and Joseph T. deNicola, Esq., for the respondent.

SCOTT

Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion

SCOTT, Judge: In these consolidated cases respondent determined deficiencies in income taxes of the petitioners for the taxable years and in the amounts as follows:

DocketTaxable
NumberPetitionerYearDeficiency
83732Louis H. Lewis and Annette Lewis1955$24,316.08
195628,202.87
83733Estate of Hyman Furst, Deceased, Louis H. Lewis,
Executor195540,992.05
195642,908.03
85162Samuel Pearl and Mary Pearl195525,806.08
195626,976.62
195738,048.98
85749Louis H. Lewis and Annette Lewis195755,511.54
85750Estate of Hyman Furst, Deceased, Louis H. Lewis,
Executor195788,514.98
94018Louis H. Lewis and Annette Lewis195862,892.92
195965,234.85
94019Estate of Hyman Furst, Deceased, Louis H. Lewis,
Executor195896,952.86
195999,411.66
91963Samuel Pearl and Mary Pearl195836,720.41
195948,846.28

*5 The issues presented for decision are:

(1) Whether petitioners are entitled to deductions as interest paid of amounts paid to Corporate Finance and Loan Corporation of Boston, Massachusetts, in 1955 and 1956.

(2) If the claimed interest deductions are not allowable, whether petitioners should be allowed for 1956 and 1957 deductions for losses incurred in transactions entered into for profit or as losses incurred because of alleged fraud or misrepresentation, or, in the alternative deductions for long-term capital losses in amounts which represent the difference between the amounts received and the amounts paid out by each petitioner in the transactions.

(3) Whether petitioners are entitled to deductions as premiums for borrowing bonds of amounts paid by them to M. Eli Livingstone in the taxable years 1957, 1958, and 1959.

Findings of Fact

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are found accordingly.

Louis H. Lewis and Annette Lewis, husband and wife residing in Chicago, Illinois, filed a joint Federal income tax return on the cash basis for each of the calendar years 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, and 1959 with the district director of internal revenue at Chicago, Illinois. *6 Samuel Pearl and Mary Pearl, husband and wife residing in Chicago, Illinois, filed a joint Federal income tax return on the cash basis for each of the calendar years 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, and 1959 with the district director of internal revenue at Chicago, Illinois.

Louis H. Lewis is a duly appointed and authorized executor of the last will and testament of Hyman Furst, deceased. Hyman Furst filed his Federal income tax returns for the calendar years 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, and 1959 on the cash basis with the district director of internal revenue at Chicago, Illinois.

Annette Lewis and Mary Pearl did not actively participate in any of the transactions here involved. Louis H. Lewis (hereinafter referred to as Lewis) and Hyman Furst (hereinafter referred to as Furst) were partners in a collection agency known as "Furst and Furst," with offices in Chicago, Illinois. Samuel Pearl (hereinafter referred to as Pearl) is an attorney with offices in Chicago, Illinois.

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

Lewis v. Commissioner, 1962 T.C. Memo. 306, 21 T.C.M. 1647, 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 3 (tax 1962).

1962 T.C. Memo. 306 (Lewis v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nichols v. Commissioner
43 T.C. 842 (U.S. Tax Court, 1965)