Ashforth v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
More than two years prior to death, and not in contemplation of death, decedent executed and delivered to her husband, without monetary consideration, a mortgage for $700,000 on certain real estate situated in the State of Connecticut.
Read the full summary
More than two years prior to death, and not in contemplation of death, decedent executed and delivered to her husband, without monetary consideration, a mortgage for $700,000 on certain real estate situated in the State of Connecticut. Held, the interest of decedent in the property, under the law of Connecticut, which is required to be included in the value of her gross estate by section 302(a) of the Revenue Act of 1926, is the full value of the land at the date of decedent's death. Held, further, that, the mortgage not having been contracted for an adequate and full consideration in money…
1Opinion of the Court
HENRY ADAMS ASHFORTH, FREDERICK H. ECKER AND HENRY L. SERVOSS, EXECUTORS OF THE ESTATE OF ELIZABETH MILBANK ASHFORTH, PETITIONERS, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.
Ashforth v. Commissioner
Docket No. 67654.
United States Board of Tax Appeals
30 B.T.A. 1306; 1934 BTA LEXIS 1194;
July 27, 1934, Promulgated
More than two years prior to death, and not in contemplation of death, decedent executed and delivered to her husband, without monetary consideration, a mortgage for $700,000 on certain real estate situated in the State of Connecticut. Held, the interest of decedent in the property,…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- New Colonial Ice Co. v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Corliss v. BowersSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Reinecke v. Northern Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Nichols v. CoolidgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Chase National Bank v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.