Smith v. Commissioner

9 T.C.M. 1084, 1950 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 27
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedNovember 29, 1950
DocketDocket No. 24188.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 9 T.C.M. 1084 (Smith v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Smith v. Commissioner, 9 T.C.M. 1084, 1950 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 27 (tax 1950).

Opinion

Courtland N. Smith v. Commissioner.
Smith v. Commissioner
Docket No. 24188.
United States Tax Court
1950 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 27; 9 T.C.M. (CCH) 1084; T.C.M. (RIA) 50286;
November 29, 1950
*27

Petitioner is a partner in a partnership which is engaged in the advertising business. In 1944, one of the partners died. The partnership agreement, among other things, contained a provision which reads: "His estate shall also be entitled to receive monthly for six (6) months a sum equal to the monthly advance payable to the deceased partner prior to his death." Under this provision the estate of the deceased partner was paid $3,333.32 in the months of November and December, 1944. The Commissioner has determined that this $3,333.32 is taxable income to the surviving partners and has taxed petitioner with his proportionate share thereof. Held, the payments were not made as a part of the purchase price of the deceased partner's interest but were of the same nature as advance payments which would have been made to the deceased partner if he had lived, and the Commissioner erred in his determination. The sum in question was not income to the surviving partners but was income to the estate of the deceased partner. Sidney Hess, 12 T.C. 773, followed.

George Link, Jr., Esq., 17 John St., New York 7, N. Y., for the petitioner. Robert M. Willan, Esq., for the respondent.

BLACK

Memorandum *28 Findings of Fact and Opinion

The Commissioner has determined a deficiency in petitioner's income tax for the year 1944 of $528.71. This deficiency is due to the fact that the Commissioner has added to the $37,459.26 net income disclosed by petitioner's return "(a) Additional partnership income $770.83." The Commissioner explains this adjustment in his deficiency notice, as follows:

"(a) The increase of $770.83 in your income for the year 1944 is your 12 1/2 percent share of $3,333.32, the increase in the partnership income of Alley and Richards Company for that year. The amount of $3,333.32 represents the disallowance of a deduction of that amount claimed by the partnership for a payment made to the widow of a deceased partner. Such amount is not an ordinary and necessary business expense under the provisions of Section 23 (a) of the Internal Revenue Code."

Petitioner by an appropriate assignment of error contests this adjustment.

Findings of Fact

Petitioner is an individual who filed his income tax return for the year 1944 with the Collector of Internal Revenue at Newark, New Jersey.

During the year 1944, petitioner was a partner in a partnership conducting a general advertising business *29 under the name of Alley & Richards Company. As a senior partner petitioner was active in the management of the partnership. He was also what is known as an account executive in charge of the handling of several accounts, including the creation, planning and selling of advertising.

The partnership agreement which was in effect during the year 1944 was entered into January 1, 1942. It provided, in part, as follows:

"4. Net profits after deduction of periodic advances to partners as hereinafter provided for shall be distributed among the partners in proportion to their shares of capital. All losses shall be borne by the partners in proportion to their shares of capital.

"5. There shall be two classes of partners, - Senior Partners and Junior Partners. Ernest V. Alley, Courtland N. Smith and H. L. Whittemore shall constitute the Senior Partners and George W. B. Hartwell, H. R. MacNamee, Harry M. Billerbeck, Deane H. Uptegrove and Joseph T. Coenen shall constitute the Junior Partners.

"6. The decision of the following matters shall rest exclusively with a majority of the Senior Partners:

(a) All questions of general business policy,

(b) The necessity for additional capital,

(c) The amount *30 of distributions by way of monthly or other periodic advances to be paid to the partners and the salaries of all employees,

(d) The duties to be performed by each partner,

(e) The establishment and maintenance of reserves of every character, and the amount or amounts to be carried to such reserves from time to time,

(f) The terms and amounts of all distributions of profits to the partners.

"7. This agreement shall endure for the calendar year 1942 and thereafter from year to year. Any partner may withdraw at the end of any calendar year provided any such withdrawing partner has given written notice to each of the other partners of his intention to withdraw at least six months before the effective date of such withdrawal.

* * *

"9. The death or withdrawal of one or more partners shall not require a liquidation of the partnership but the partnership business shall be continued by the remaining partners under the same name as a continuing partnership subject to all the applicable terms and conditions of this agreement, or any amendments thereof or additions thereto, provided however, that if said Alley withdraws, his name shall not be used without his permission after six (6) months from *31 the day of his withdrawal. Any withdrawing partner or partners or the estate of any deceased partner or partners shall not be entitled to share in the profits of the continuing partnership and the partners of the continuing partnership shall indemnify and save harmless the withdrawing partner or partners or the estate of the deceased partner or partners from any and all acts and liabilities of the continuing partnership, provided however, that any retiring partner or partners shall continue to be liable for all debts, obligations or liabilities incurred by the partnership prior to any such withdrawal or death.

"10.

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

Related

Bull v. United States
295 U.S. 247 (Supreme Court, 1935)
Coates v. Commissioner
7 T.C. 125 (U.S. Tax Court, 1946)
Estate of Remington v. Commissioner
9 T.C. 99 (U.S. Tax Court, 1947)
Barth v. Commissioner
35 B.T.A. 546 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 T.C.M. 1084, 1950 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-commissioner-tax-1950.