Legal Opinion
Elwood v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Decided April 30, 1979No. Docket No. 4172-76PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Held, depreciation is not an expense paid for purposes of sec. 213, I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Irwin, Judge:
The respondent determined a deficiency of $350 in petitioners’ joint Federal income tax for the calendar year 1974.
Due to concessions, the only issue remaining for our decision is whether depreciation is an expense paid within the meaning of section 213.1
All of the facts have been stipulated. The stipulation of facts along with attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference.
Petitioners Jesse B. and Rose L. Elwood, husband and wife, resided in Ukiah, Calif., at the time they filed their petition herein. They timely filed a joint Federal income tax return for…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Aquilino v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Commissioner v. Idaho Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- W. Lawrence Oliver and Hazel P. Oliver v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1966
- Gordon v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1962
- Gerard v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1962
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Elwood v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1979
- Henderson v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2000
- Pfersching v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1983