Victorson v. Commissioner

1962 T.C. Memo. 231, 21 T.C.M. 1238, 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 77
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedOctober 1, 1962
DocketDocket Nos. 83595, 83596.
StatusUnpublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 1962 T.C. Memo. 231 (Victorson 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
Victorson v. Commissioner, 1962 T.C. Memo. 231, 21 T.C.M. 1238, 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 77 (tax 1962).

Opinion

Edward C. Victorson and Anne Victorson v. Commissioner. Graham, Ross & Co., Inc. v. Commissioner.
Victorson v. Commissioner
Docket Nos. 83595, 83596.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1962-231; 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 77; 21 T.C.M. (CCH) 1238; T.C.M. (RIA) 62231;
October 1, 1962
Martin M. Lore, Esq., 107 William St., New York, N. Y., for the petitioners. Theodore E. Davis, Esq., and Leon M. Kerry, Esq., for the respondent.

RAUM

Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion

In these consolidated cases, the Commissioner determined deficiencies in income tax and additions to tax as follows:

Docket No. 83595, Edward C. Victorson
and Anne Victorson
YearDeficiency
1954$ 4,461.64
195523,758.54
195615,170.97
Docket No. 83596, Graham, Ross & Co., Inc.
Addition to Tax
Year EndedDeficiencySection 6653(b)
April 30, 1955$22,775.04$11,387.52
April 30, 195674,652.8737,326.44
April 30, 195752,553.14
*78 By amendment to his answer in Docket No. 83596, the Commissioner affirmatively alleged that the $127,350 in additional income which the deficiency notice had determined was realized by the corporate petitioner in either its fiscal year ended April 30, 1956 or 1957, was, in the alternative, realized by the corporate petitioner in its fiscal year ended April 30, 1955.

After certain concessions by petitioners, the issues remaining for decision are: (1) whether payments to Miriam Ross Victorson in 1954 and 1955 by Graham, Ross & Co. constituted dividends to its sole stockholder, Edward C. Victorson; (2) and (3) whether the exercise of certain options to purchase stock in each of two corporations in 1955 resulted in taxable income; if it did, when and in what amounts did it constitute such income; and, in the case of Edward C. Victorson, whether such income constituted a dividend from Graham, Ross & Co.; (4) whether Graham, Ross & Co. is entitled to deductions for business expenses for the taxable years in issue in excess of those allowed by the Commissioner; and (5) whether the failure of Graham, Ross & Co. to file corporate income tax returns for its fiscal years ended April 30, 1955 and*79 1956 and the resulting underpayment of taxes was due either to fraud or, in the alternative, to willful neglect without reasonable cause.

Findings of Fact

The facts stipulated by the parties are incorporated herein by this reference.

Edward C. and Anne Victorson, husband and wife residing at 2575 Jerome Avenue, Bronx, New York, filed joint income tax returns for the taxable years 1954, 1955, and 1956 with the district director of internal revenue for the Upper Manhattan district of New York. Anne is a party hereto solely because joint returns were filed. Edward will be referred to hereinafter as Victorson.

Graham, Ross & Co., Inc., a New York corporation with offices at 141 Broadway, New York, New York, filed its corporate income tax return for the fiscal year ended April 30, 1957, with the district director of internal revenue for the Lower Manhattan district of New York. The corporation, hereinafter referred to as Graham Ross, did not file corporate income tax returns for the fiscal years ended April 30, 1955 and 1956.

During the taxable years in issue, Graham Ross was engaged in the stock brokerage and underwriting business as an over-the-counter house.

1. In January*80 1954, the authorized capital stock of Graham Ross consisted of 300 shares of preferred stock, all of one class and without par value, and 200 shares of common stock, also all of one class and without par value. At that time, the company had issued an outstanding 200 shares of preferred stock and 100 shares of common stock.

Victorson became a salesman for Graham Ross in 1948, at which time all of the issued and outstanding stock of Graham Ross was owned by Victorson's brother who actively ran the business. Thereafter, Victorson became the manager of the sales force of Graham Ross. Victorson's brother died in September 1953, and left all of the issued and outstanding stock of Graham Ross to his wife, Miriam Ross Victorson.

Under the terms of an agreement dated January 27, 1954, between Victorson as "buyer", Miriam Ross Victorson as "seller", and Graham Ross, Victorson agreed to purchase all of the issued and outstanding stock of Graham Ross from Miriam Ross Victorson for a total price of $30,500, payable by Victorson to Miriam Ross Victorson in specified installments from the date of the agreement until July 1, 1955. The agreement provided among other things that Victorson would*81

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

Related

Weigl v. Commissioner
84 T.C. No. 66 (U.S. Tax Court, 1985)
Diamond v. Commissioner
56 T.C. 530 (U.S. Tax Court, 1971)
Silverman v. Commissioner
1968 T.C. Memo. 216 (U.S. Tax Court, 1968)
Vocelle v. Commissioner
1968 T.C. Memo. 5 (U.S. Tax Court, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1962 T.C. Memo. 231, 21 T.C.M. 1238, 1962 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/victorson-v-commissioner-tax-1962.