Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. The Bagley & Sewall Co.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided April 21, 1955No. 109, Docket 23096Published

1DissentFrank, Circuit Judge

Congress, in Section 23, prescribed the items which may be deducted in computing net income. In Section 23(g) (1), it provided that “losses from sales or exchanges of capital assets shall be allowed only to the extent provided in section 117.” Then, in Section 117, sub-paragraph (a) (1), Congress explicitly defined “capital assets” to mean “property held by the taxpayer (whether or not connected with his trade or business)”. Had Congress stopped there, perhaps it would be proper to do, as my colleagues do, i. e., to find in Section 23(a) (1) (A) and (f) exceptions to the definition contained…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Webster v. FallSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. Spring City Foundry Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  3. Cunard Steamship Co. v. MellonSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  4. Helvering v. Cement Investors, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
  5. Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. WalshSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API