Union Savings Bank v. Commissioner

Board of Tax Appeals

Union Savings Bank v. Commissioner

10 B.T.A. 1175

CourtUnited States Board of Tax Appeals

DecidedMarch 6, 1928

DocketDocket No. 10135

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 B.T.A. 1175 (Union Savings Bank 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

Union Savings Bank v. Commissioner, 10 B.T.A. 1175 (bta 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

[1176]*1176OPINION.

Trammell:

The petitioner claims a deduction of $2,800 because this amount was charged off its books during the taxable year in order to make its savings account balance. There is no allegation or evidence that any loss was actually sustained by the petitioner during the taxable year. If the books were out of balance it might have been due entirely to the fact that they were improperly kept, but mere bookkeeping entries in and of themselves do not establish a loss.

Judgment will he entered for the resfondent.

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

[1176]*1176OPINION.

Trammell:

The petitioner claims a deduction of $2,800 because this amount was charged off its books during the taxable year in order to make its savings account balance. There is no allegation or evidence that any loss was actually sustained by the petitioner during the taxable year. If the books were out of balance it might have been due entirely to the fact that they were improperly kept, but mere bookkeeping entries in and of themselves do not establish a loss.

Judgment will he entered for the resfondent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 B.T.A. 1175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-savings-bank-v-commissioner-bta-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack