Cooper v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, petitioner is entitled to deduct certain expenses incurred as a condition of his employment as ordinary and necessary business expenses under sec. 162(a), I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
Robert E. Cooper, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Cooper v. Commissioner
Docket Nos. 3164-75, 6401-75
United States Tax Court
67 T.C. 870; 1977 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 148;
February 28, 1977, Filed
Decisions will be entered under Rule 155.
Held, petitioner is entitled to deduct certain expenses incurred as a condition of his employment as ordinary and necessary business expenses under sec. 162(a), I.R.C. 1954.
Robert E. Radke, for the petitioner.
George W. McDonald, for the respondent.
Fay, Judge. Simpson, J., concurring. Dawson, Scott, Tannenwald, Featherston, and Wilbur, JJ.,…
Also in this document: Concurrence; Dissent.
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Welch v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Kroll v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1968
- Primuth v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- Drill v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Roth v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1952
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.