De Cou v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, a loss sustained as a result of the abnormal retirement of a building from the taxpayer's business (caused by a casualty to or an extraordinary obsolescence of the building) and sustained prior to the demolition of the building is not treated as having been sustained "on account of" the demolition of the building, and such loss will not be disallowed under sec. 280B, I.R.C.
1Opinion of the Court
Swift, Judge:
Respondent determined a deficiency of $25,675 in petitioners’ joint Federal income tax for 1985. The issue for decision is whether petitioners are entitled to an ordinary loss deduction under sections 165(a) and 167 with respect to losses associated with a building demolished in 1985.
Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. At the time the petition was filed, petitioners resided in Corpus Christi, Texas.
Since 1970, petitioner Charles…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Crane v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- United States v. S. S. White Dental Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Heyn v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1966
- White v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1967
- Coors Porcelain Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Anschutz Co. v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2006
- De Cou v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1994