Gilman v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. Held, that certain payments by petitioner to his wife and children in the circumstances herein were not deductible from gross income for Federal tax purposes in the year in which they were made. 2. Respondent's motion to amend answer byan affirmative allegation of fraud denied.
1Opinion of the Court
*1280OPINION.
Lansdon:
The parties have stipulated that the profit realized from the petitioner’s sale of certain property in the year 1922 was $2,500 instead of $5,000, and that the profit realized from the sale of certain property in 1923 Avas $15,000, instead of $11,488.71, as asserted by the respondent in the deficiency notice. Effect of this stipulation should be reflected in the recomputation under Eule 50 of any tax liability for such year.
The single issue submitted to the Board is whether certain payments by the petitioner to his wife and children in each of the taxable years, in the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Saleno v. City of NeoshoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- French v. City of BurlingtonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Burnham v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
- Williams v. ForbesIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
- Trask v. Livingston CountySupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Estate of Franklin v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1975
- Stringer v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1985
- Stanton v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1960
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. ParkCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940
- Howlett v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1971
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.