Anderson v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner paid certain sums to his employer because his sale and purchase of stock constituted an apparent violation of sec. 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Held, petitioner's payment constituted ordinary and necessary business expense. William L. Mitchell, 52 T.C. 170 (1969), revd. 428 F. 2d 259 (C.A. 6, 1970), reaffirmed.
1Opinion of the Court
James E. Anderson and Alice Anderson, Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Anderson v. Commissioner
Docket No. 1533-70
United States Tax Court
56 T.C. 1370; 1971 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 52;
September 27, 1971, Filed
Decision will be entered for the petitioners.
Petitioner paid certain sums to his employer because his sale and purchase of stock constituted an apparent violation of sec. 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Held, petitioner's payment constituted ordinary and necessary business expense. William L. Mitchell, 52 T.C. 170 (1969), revd. 428 F. 2d 259 (C.A. 6,…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Arrowsmith v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- United States v. Skelly Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- John M. Trent and Lisa M. Trent v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Hale v. HelveringCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1936
- George P. Weddle and Bertha R. (Terris) Weddle v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.