Lougee v. Commissioner

First Circuit

Lougee v. Commissioner

63 F.2d 112, 12 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 141, 1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 3336, 1933 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9104, 12 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 141

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedJanuary 31, 1933

DocketNo. 2754

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 63 F.2d 112 (Lougee v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lougee v. Commissioner, 63 F.2d 112, 12 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 141, 1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 3336, 1933 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9104, 12 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 141 (1st Cir. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

BINGHAM, Circuit Judge.

This is a petition to revise a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals sustaining a deficiency tax of $1,136.23 assessed against the petitioner upon $16,000, which he failed to return as income for the year 1926.

The Board of Tax Appeals found as a fact that the $16,000 was received by the petitioner in 1926 as additional compensation for past services in the nature of salary and was taxable income. The petitioner’s [113]*113contention is that the $16,000 was paid to and received by him as a gift.

As the scope of review by this court of decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals is confined to questions of law, tho only legal question presented is whether there was any evidence from which the Board could find that the $16,000 was received by the petitioner as compensation for past services. We do not regard it necessary to recount the evidence. We have carefully examined it, and are of the opinion that it was sufficient to sustain the finding of the Board. There was a conflict of evidence upon the question, and, where such is the ease, the finding of the Board is final.

The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is affirmed.

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

BINGHAM, Circuit Judge.

This is a petition to revise a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals sustaining a deficiency tax of $1,136.23 assessed against the petitioner upon $16,000, which he failed to return as income for the year 1926.

The Board of Tax Appeals found as a fact that the $16,000 was received by the petitioner in 1926 as additional compensation for past services in the nature of salary and was taxable income. The petitioner’s [113]*113contention is that the $16,000 was paid to and received by him as a gift.

As the scope of review by this court of decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals is confined to questions of law, tho only legal question presented is whether there was any evidence from which the Board could find that the $16,000 was received by the petitioner as compensation for past services. We do not regard it necessary to recount the evidence. We have carefully examined it, and are of the opinion that it was sufficient to sustain the finding of the Board. There was a conflict of evidence upon the question, and, where such is the ease, the finding of the Board is final.

The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 F.2d 112, 12 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 141, 1933 U.S. App. LEXIS 3336, 1933 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 9104, 12 A.F.T.R. (RIA) 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lougee-v-commissioner-ca1-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack