Case law

Mayer v. Commissioner

43 T.C. 403 · United States Tax Court · Dec 31, 1964

In order to establish a more accurate basis for reporting the value of the foregoing stock on the Federal estate tax return, it was decided that the stock should first be valued by the New York tax authorities. … Considering petitioner’s general familiarity with tax law and the fact that the due date of the return was clearly called to' his attention on the “Estate Tax Preliminary Notice,” we think that petitioner’s minimum responsibility

Rechtzigel v. Commissioner

79 T.C. 132 · United States Tax Court · Jul 26, 1982

Because the burden of proving fraud is on the Commissioner, we held that he had not established fraud. 7 The affirmative proof requirement does not necessarily require that evidence actually be presented at trial to establish … Commissioner, supra, as being inapplicable to the particular facts of that case because the petitioner had clearly and unequivocally stated to the Court that he would not contest the fraud addition.

Hart-Bartlett-Sturtevant Grain Co. v. Commissioner

12 T.C. 760 · United States Tax Court · May 12, 1949

We must never lose sight of the fundamental purpose of the legislation, which was to establish a measure by which the amount of profits which were “excess” could be judged. … The question then is simply whether or not these sums qualify as borrowed invested capital within the intent of the statute and under the disputed regulation.

Okerson v. Comm'r

123 T.C. 258 · United States Tax Court · Sep 9, 2004

That John Russell Okerson by his attorney, states that in the trial transcript of this Cause held before the Honorable Wyeth Chandler, the Court clearly stated more than one time that the Court intended all ordered alimony … The standard established by Congress for substitute payments is not, as petitioners would have it, whether a payor spouse actually makes a substitute payment.

Foskett & Bishop Co. v. Commissioner

16 T.C. 456 · United States Tax Court · Feb 27, 1951

Thus, not every event or circumstance which has an adverse effect on a taxpayer’s profits may serve to qualify that taxpayer for relief under subsection (b) (2). … First, the temporary and unusual character of the circumstance or event must be clearly established.

Estate of Bowling v. Commissioner

93 T.C. 286 · United States Tax Court · Aug 31, 1989

Under paragraph 11(f) of the will, a testamentary trust was established primarily for the benefit of decedent’s surviving spouse. … Ohio 1987, 87-1 USTC par. 13,708 ), the reference to any beneficiary in the contested portion of the will clearly referred only to a current income beneficiary.

National States Ins. Co. v. Commissioner

81 T.C. 325 · United States Tax Court · Sep 19, 1983

Barnhart, petitioner established a premium structure for its individual guaranteed renewable policies. … Accordingly, petitioner asserts its contracts qualify.

Precision Industries, Inc. v. Commissioner

64 T.C. 901 · United States Tax Court · Aug 19, 1975

Petitioner argues that these oral representations to the employees coupled with the informal agreement by the directors to adopt the plan clearly establish that Precision incurred an accruable liability in fiscal year ended … Clearly, the second alleged communication to the employees is of little aid to petitioner because we do not even know whether it was given prior to March 31,1970.

Grow v. Commissioner

80 T.C. 314 · United States Tax Court · Jan 31, 1983

First, we must decide whether the water and sewer system qualifies in the first instance as section 38 property. … Respondent argues that the petitioners have not established that they were in the trade or business of furnishing water or sewer services.

Packard v. Commissioner

63 T.C. 621 · United States Tax Court · Mar 11, 1975

employees into separate entities to avoid having to cover them under plans established for their own benefit. … It clearly chose not to bring them or their corporate shareholder employees within the purview of section 401(d). See also section 1.401-10(d), Income Tax Regs., for definition of owner-employee.

Efco Tool Co. v. Commissioner

81 T.C. 976 · United States Tax Court · Dec 15, 1983

In August 1977, petitioner, a Michigan corporation, established both a profit-sharing plan and a retirement pension plan for the benefit of its employees. … The petition and its attachments clearly contain sufficient information from which to determine that four of the five limitations have been satisfied.

Julia R. & Estelle L. Foundation, Inc. v. Commissioner

70 T.C. 1 · United States Tax Court · Apr 5, 1978

In his deficiency notice, respondent allowed only $1,399 thereof on the ground that petitioner had not established that the disallowed portion had been paid or incurred for purposes permitted by section 4940(c)(3)(A). … deductions minus taxes imposed on the foundation under subtitle A and sec. 4940; (c) qualifying distributions equals administrative expenses plus other qualifying distributions.

Jones v. Commissioner

51 T.C. 651 · United States Tax Court · Jan 27, 1969

We are satisfied that section 405 does not establish standards for determination of the existence of a qualified retirement bond purchase plan, independent of section 401. … That form does no more than establish certain details as of the date of that filing.

Paula Constr. Co. v. Commissioner

58 T.C. 1055 · United States Tax Court · Sep 28, 1972

-Wooten, its accountant, all believed that PCC qualified as a subchapter S corporation. … Thus, the petitioner cannot,establish reasonable cause by arguing that it relied upon the advice of its accountant. , .

Dixson Int'l Service Corp. v. Commissioner

94 T.C. 708 · United States Tax Court · May 17, 1990

International conceded that it did not qualify as a DISC during the tax, year ended September 30, 1977. … We have previously indicated that it is preferable for the Commissioner to clearly indicate that he is taking alternative positions and state that he has no intention to tax the same income or disallow the same deductions

Estate of McCoy v. Commissioner

50 T.C. 562 · United States Tax Court · Jul 3, 1968

Petitioner argues that the amounts of the widow’s allowances are a proper deduction from the estate’s income since they clearly qualify as “any other amounts properly paid * * * or required to foe distributed” under section … The facts here clearly fall within regulation 1.661 (a)-2(e), and petitioner’s only possible chance to win is a frontal assault on the regulations.

Lawinger v. Comm'r

103 T.C. 428 · United States Tax Court · Sep 1, 1994

Although this is a fully stipulated case, petitioner still bears the burden of proof and must establish the facts necessary to her case. Borchers v. … The omission of the discharge of indebtedness income in the amount of $70,312 results in an understatement of income tax that clearly exceeds either of the statutory floor amounts.

Jacob Sincoff, Inc. v. Commissioner

20 T.C. 288 · United States Tax Court · Apr 30, 1953

The evidence as a whole clearly indicates that no expansion in the business was contemplated at the close of 1945. … The record is somewhat vague as to just what amounts the petitioner is contending qualify as indebtedness under section 719 (a) (1).

Bagley v. Commissioner

85 T.C. 663 · United States Tax Court · Oct 30, 1985

Although petitioner argues otherwise, a review of the facts herein clearly establishes that the option was granted by Spencer Foods in connection with petitioner’s performance of services. … Petitioner concedes that the option was not actively traded on an established market.

Associated Master Barbers & Beauticians, Inc. v. Commissioner

48 A.L.R. Fed. 165 · United States Tax Court · Oct 20, 1977

Petitioner is clearly an association of persons having a common business interest. … Petitioner is clearly a membership organization.