Mather v. Commissioner
This text of 18 B.T.A. 1068 (Mather 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.
Opinion
[1069]*1069OPINION.
The foregoing facts have been' found from the admissions contained in respondent’s answer and a stipulation filed. No evidence was offered to show that the amounts covered by the dividend checks were not unqualifiedly subject to petitioner’s demand in the year in which the respondent included them in income. See section 201 (e), Revenue Act of 1921. The respondent’s determination must accordingly be affirmed. Cf. Hiram C. Wilson, 17 B. T. A. 976; Commissioner v. Bingham, 35 Fed. (2d) 503.
Decision will he entered for the respondent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 B.T.A. 1068, 1930 BTA LEXIS 2532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mather-v-commissioner-bta-1930.