Adler v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Petitioner claimed for 1941 a deduction arising from the loss of stock in a French company. Held, petitioner failed to sustain his burden of proving ownership of the stock at any time in 1941 and is not therefore entitled to a loss deduction under section 23 (e), Internal Revenue Code; held, further, that petitioner is not entitled to a war loss deduction in 1941 under section 127 (a) (2) and (3) for the same reason.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Hill, Judge:
In our opinion petitioner has failed to prove the necessary facts to entitle him to a loss deduction in 1941. Petitioner was the only witness at the hearing. Having left Paris in mid-1940, his knowledge of the status of Adler Co.’s assets or its stock is, of necessity, hearsay.
Petitioner offered certain documents in evidence purporting to be depositions. These documents are in the form of statements by one Albert Mingasson, crier of the court to the Civil Tribunal of the Seine. These statements by Mingasson recite that the alleged deponent appeared before him and informed…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ford v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 1946
- Houdry v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1946
3Cited by26 opinions
- Abraham v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Solt v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1952
- Heckett v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Rozenfeld v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1950
- Wyman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1958
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.