Rubino v. Commissioner

Ninth Circuit

Rubino v. Commissioner

186 F.2d 304

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 2, 1951

DocketNos. 12535, 12536

StatusPublished

Cited by29 cases

This text of 186 F.2d 304 (Rubino v. Commissioner) 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

Rubino v. Commissioner, 186 F.2d 304 (9th Cir. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

These cases are here on petition to review a decision of the Tax Court relating to a deficiency assessment. The Commissioner had determined that the property involved, namely, a number of houses constructed by the petitioners, were held by the latter primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course o.f trade or business within the meaning of § 117(j) (1) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 117(j) (1), hence the profit from the sale is taxable •as ordinary income. Petitioners’ argument is that the property was held primarily for rental purposes, and that the gains from the sales should be treated as long-term capital gains. The Tax Court made findings resolving the dispute in favor of the Commissioner’s determination.

The issue is essentially one of fact. We see no clear error in the Court’s finding, and its judgment is accordingly affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

These cases are here on petition to review a decision of the Tax Court relating to a deficiency assessment. The Commissioner had determined that the property involved, namely, a number of houses constructed by the petitioners, were held by the latter primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course o.f trade or business within the meaning of § 117(j) (1) of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 117(j) (1), hence the profit from the sale is taxable •as ordinary income. Petitioners’ argument is that the property was held primarily for rental purposes, and that the gains from the sales should be treated as long-term capital gains. The Tax Court made findings resolving the dispute in favor of the Commissioner’s determination.

The issue is essentially one of fact. We see no clear error in the Court’s finding, and its judgment is accordingly affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 F.2d 304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rubino-v-commissioner-ca9-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack