Nass v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Nass v. Commissioner

5 B.T.A. 665, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2813

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedNovember 27, 1926

DocketDocket No. 2447.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 B.T.A. 665 (Nass 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

Nass v. Commissioner, 5 B.T.A. 665, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2813 (bta 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

[666]*666OPINION.

Lansdon:

In conformity with section 283 of the Revenue Act of 1926, the motion of the Commissioner praying that this appeal be dismissed is denied.

The petitioner contends that he acquired certain stock in 1915 at a cost of $30,000. He sold the same in 1919 for $12,000, and thereby sustained a loss in the amount of $18,000, which, he avers, he is entitled to deduct from his gross income for such year. Since the stock in question was acquired subsequent to March 1, 1913, he must prove its cost at date of acquisition. He has proven simply the par value of the stock at the time of its acquisition. This obviously does not necessarily represent cost, and we are therefore without any basis for the determination of gain or loss upon subsequent sale in the taxable year.

Judgment will he entered for the Commissioner.

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

[666]*666OPINION.

Lansdon:

In conformity with section 283 of the Revenue Act of 1926, the motion of the Commissioner praying that this appeal be dismissed is denied.

The petitioner contends that he acquired certain stock in 1915 at a cost of $30,000. He sold the same in 1919 for $12,000, and thereby sustained a loss in the amount of $18,000, which, he avers, he is entitled to deduct from his gross income for such year. Since the stock in question was acquired subsequent to March 1, 1913, he must prove its cost at date of acquisition. He has proven simply the par value of the stock at the time of its acquisition. This obviously does not necessarily represent cost, and we are therefore without any basis for the determination of gain or loss upon subsequent sale in the taxable year.

Judgment will he entered for the Commissioner.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 B.T.A. 665, 1926 BTA LEXIS 2813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nass-v-commissioner-bta-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack