Pal International Corporation v. Commissioner Internal Revenue Service

46 F.3d 1143, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 7266
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 10, 1995
Docket93-70568
StatusUnpublished

This text of 46 F.3d 1143 (Pal International Corporation v. Commissioner Internal Revenue Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pal International Corporation v. Commissioner Internal Revenue Service, 46 F.3d 1143, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 7266 (9th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

46 F.3d 1143

75 A.F.T.R.2d 95-571, 95-1 USTC P 50,070

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
PAL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
COMMISSIONER INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 93-70568.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Dec. 15, 1994.
Decided Jan. 10, 1995.

Before: SKOPIL, NORRIS, and HALL, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM*

Taxpayer challenges the tax court's finding that it is not entitled to deduct the value of funds and assets diverted by a 50% shareholder as either a theft loss or as compensation for services. We affirm.

Taxpayer failed to show that the tax court committed clear error in finding that the property taken from the corporation was not intended as compensation. See Whitcomb v. Commissioner, 733 F.2d 191, 195 (1st Cir.1984) (reviewing for clear error). We need not examine whether a theft occurred, because Taxpayer failed to show clear error in the tax court's conclusion that there existed a reasonable prospect of recovering the purportedly stolen property in the year of the deduction. See Korn v. Commissioner, 524 F.2d 888, 890 (9th Cir.1975) (reviewing for clear error); 26 C.F.R. Sec. 1.165-1(d)(3).

AFFIRMED.

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 F.3d 1143, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 7266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pal-international-corporation-v-commissioner-inter-ca9-1995.