Lieb v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
H purchased callable bonds at a premium on the open market. The amortization deduction of the excess of the purchase price over the special call price is not in issue. Six months and one day thereafter H "sold" the bonds to W, his wife, and forty-nine days after that W "sold" the bonds back to H. Held, the sales between H and W were lacking in bona fides and amortization deductions are not allowable in respect of such sales. Sec. 171, I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
David L. Lieb and Sylvia Lieb, Petitioners, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Lieb v. Commissioner
Docket No. 91329
United States Tax Court
40 T.C. 161; 1963 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 142;
April 26, 1963, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 50.
H purchased callable bonds at a premium on the open market. The amortization deduction of the excess of the purchase price over the special call price is not in issue. Six months and one day thereafter H "sold" the bonds to W, his wife, and forty-nine days after that W "sold" the bonds back to H. Held, the sales between H and W were lacking in…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Helvering v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Knetsch v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Hanover Bank v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Carl E. Weller and Emily I. Weller v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, W. Stuart Emmons v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
- Emmons v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1958
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.