First Nat'l Bank v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. Depreciation allowed on office building increased on account of obsolescence resulting from improvements in the art of constructing such buildings. 2. An amount expended in replacing the electrical system in one of petitioner's buildings held to be a capital expenditure. 3. Certain donations determined not to have been necessary business expenses.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Lansdon :
The respondent has determined a deficiency in income tax for the year 1929 in the amount of $599.75. The petitioner is a national banking corporation, with its principal office at Mobile, Alabama. The issues are: (1) Insufficient depreciation allowance on an annex to its bank building constructed in 1929; (2) erroneous computation of allowance for depreciation of its mechanical equipment; (3) disallowance by respondent as ordinary expense of an amount alleged to have been expended for necessary repairs on its old bank building; (4) disallowance of deduction representing…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Welch v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Burnet v. Niagara Falls Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- United Business Corp. of Am. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1930
- Parkersburg Iron & Steel Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1929
- Adam, Meldrum & Anderson Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kent v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1953
- Bank of Houston v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1960
- First Nat'l Bank v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934