Keneipp v. United States

LETTS, District Judge.

The evidence makes crystal clear that some of the property taken under the eminent domain proceedings was used by the taxpayers to produce income. This has ample support in the taxpayers’ returns for several years preceding t'he tax year in question as well as for the year in question. Since the property was used by the taxpayers in a business, the Commissioner was authorized to determine that which is a return of capital and that which is a return of ordinary income. The fact that the condemnation award made no division as between capital and income is of no importance.

S…