Pickus v. Commissioner

1963 T.C. Memo. 342, 22 T.C.M. 1791, 1963 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 4
United States Tax Court·Decided December 30, 1963·No. Docket No. 90659.·Unpublished

Opinion

Abe Pickus and Etta Pickus v. Commissioner.
Pickus v. Commissioner
Docket No. 90659.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1963-342; 1963 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 4; 22 T.C.M. (CCH) 1791; T.C.M. (RIA) 63342;
December 30, 1963

*4 Held: Unimproved real estate purchased at tax-delinquency sales and held for substantial periods without development or sales activity was not held for sale to customers in the ordinary course of taxpayer's trade or business. Proper years to report certain income determined.

Martin A. Rini, 830 Bulkley Bldg., Cleveland, Ohio, for the petitioners. Buckley D. Sowards for the respondent.

TRAIN

Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion

TRAIN, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies in income tax and an addition to tax for the calendar years and in the amounts as follows:

Addition to Tax
Sec. 294(d)(2)
YearDeficiency1939 Code
1949$ 1,233.92
19506,438.20
195251,480.33$3,304.27
19543,002.43
19553,738.62
19564,110.05
195714,060.63
19585,193.15
*5 In addition, an overassessment of $3,245.70 was determined for 1951.

The issues for decision are stipulated to be as follows:

(1) Whether the petitioners, doing business as A. & E. Pickus Company, a partnership, are in the business of selling real estate so that gain realized from the sale of land is ordinary income;

(2) Whether a certain note and mortgage received from Nathan Staman should be included in petitioners' income for the year 1952;

(3) The proper year for including the gain realized from the sale of the following property:

(a) Sublot 122 known as the Gould lot;

(b) Eighty-eight lots known as the Hathaway lots;

(c) Seventeen lots known as East 141st Street lots; and

(d) Sublot 89 Brunswick and Sublots 43, 44, 45 and 46 Rockside;

(4) Whether income identified as "income from Robert Levin, trustee" was taxable to the petitioners as ordinary income or as capital gain;

(5) Whether the income received by Mendotta, Inc., and Corkhill, Inc., should be attributed to the A. & E. Pickus Company, partnership; and

(6) Whether petitioners are liable for the addition to tax under section 294(d)(2) for the year 1952.

Other adjustments made by the respondent for*6 the years 1949, 1950, 1952, and 1954 through 1958, inclusive, are not contested by the petitioners.

Findings of Fact

Some of the facts have been stipulated and have been incorporated herein.

Petitioners, Abe Pickus (sometimes hereinafter referred to as Abe) and Etta Pickus (sometimes hereinafter referred to as Etta), are husband and wife and reside in Shaker Heights, Ohio. For the calendar years 1949 through 1958, petitioners filed joint Federal income tax returns on the cash basis of accounting with the district director of internal revenue or his predecessor, the collector of internal revenue, Cleveland, Ohio.

In January 1942, Abe and Etta formed a partnership known as A. & E. Pickus Company (hereinafter sometimes referred to as A&E). For the calendar years 1949 through 1958, partnership returns were filed with the district director of internal revenue or his predecessor, the collector of internal revenue, Cleveland, Ohio. A&E used an accrual basis of accounting. The partnership received the bulk of its income from various rental properties, management fees, and from the sales of land here involved. Abe carried on the daily business of the partnership while Etta kept the*7 records of cash transactions.

Beginning in 1939 the Cuyahoga County auditor embarked upon a program of selling at forfeited land sales thousands of parcels of land after advertising the same for sale in the newspapers and after giving public notice that the parcels of land would be sold to the highest bidder.

The following schedule shows the number of parcels advertised by the Cuyahoga Country auditor, the number of sales, the average tax assessment value, and the average successful bid price for the years 1939 through 1958:

Average Tax
Assess-Average

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

Pickus v. Commissioner, 1963 T.C. Memo. 342, 22 T.C.M. 1791, 1963 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 4 (tax 1963).

1963 T.C. Memo. 342 (Pickus v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Spring City Foundry Co. v. Commissioner
292 U.S. 182 (Supreme Court, 1934)
Moline Properties, Inc. v. Commissioner
319 U.S. 436 (Supreme Court, 1943)
National Carbide Corp. v. Commissioner
336 U.S. 422 (Supreme Court, 1949)
Palos Verdes Corp. v. United States
201 F.2d 256 (Ninth Circuit, 1952)
Snell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
97 F.2d 891 (Fifth Circuit, 1938)
Forro v. Buckeye Realty of Cleveland, Inc.
170 N.E. 878 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1929)
Merchants Nat'l Bank v. Commissioner
14 T.C. 1375 (U.S. Tax Court, 1950)
Mauldin v. Commissioner
16 T.C. 698 (U.S. Tax Court, 1951)
Phillips v. Comissioner of Internal Revenue
24 T.C. 435 (U.S. Tax Court, 1955)
Wood v. Commissioner
25 T.C. 468 (U.S. Tax Court, 1955)
Philbin v. Commissioner
26 T.C. 1159 (U.S. Tax Court, 1956)
Shaw Constr. Co. v. Commissioner
35 T.C. 1102 (U.S. Tax Court, 1961)
Starke v. Commissioner
35 T.C. 18 (U.S. Tax Court, 1960)
Merrill v. Commissioner
40 T.C. 66 (U.S. Tax Court, 1963)