Bialock v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
1. Held, that there was not a valid family partnership consisting of the petitioner and his two minor children; the petitioner was the sole owner of the business and is entitled to deduct the losses sustained in the business and is taxable upon the gains.
Read the full summary
1. Held, that there was not a valid family partnership consisting of the petitioner and his two minor children; the petitioner was the sole owner of the business and is entitled to deduct the losses sustained in the business and is taxable upon the gains. Held, further, that since no partnership returns were ever filed and since the petitioner had always represented in his individual returns that the business was a sole proprietorship, the petitioner is not precluded from denying the existence of a partnership. 2. Held, that in 1953 the assets of the petitioner's business were transferred to…
1Opinion of the Court
Harry L. Bialock and Nancy L. Bialock, Petitioners, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Bialock v. Commissioner
Docket No. 72360
United States Tax Court
35 T.C. 649; 1961 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 240;
January 27, 1961, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 50.
1. Held, that there was not a valid family partnership consisting of the petitioner and his two minor children; the petitioner was the sole owner of the business and is entitled to deduct the losses sustained in the business and is taxable upon the gains. Held, further, that since no partnership returns were ever filed and since the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Lucas v. EarlSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Commissioner v. CulbertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- United States v. Kirby Lumber CoSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- National Licorice Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Commissioner v. JacobsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.