Thompson v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
On their return for the year 1956, petitioners reported income from a certain "Navy Contract" in the amount of $256,135.85. In his notice of deficiency respondent determined that petitioners used an accrual basis of accounting.
Read the full summary
On their return for the year 1956, petitioners reported income from a certain "Navy Contract" in the amount of $256,135.85. In his notice of deficiency respondent determined that petitioners used an accrual basis of accounting. Respondent further determined that only $6,626.09 of the above amount was includable in petitioners' income for 1956 and that the balance accrued during the years 1953 and 1954 in the respective amounts of $67,774.13 and $181,735.63. Held: Since petitioners failed to prove error, respondent's determination is sustained. Respondent determined in the statutory notice…
1Opinion of the Court
L. E. Thompson and Ruby Thompson v. Commissioner.
Thompson v. Commissioner
Docket No. 4169-62.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1971-321; 1971 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 10; 30 T.C.M. (CCH) 1383; T.C.M. (RIA) 71321;
December 22, 1971, Filed.
On their return for the year 1956, petitioners reported income from a certain "Navy Contract" in the amount of $256,135.85. In his notice of deficiency respondent determined that petitioners used an accrual basis of accounting. Respondent further determined that only $6,626.09 of the above amount was includable in petitioners' income for 1956 and that the balance…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Welch v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- United States v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Old Colony Trust Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Lucas v. American Code Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1930
- Spring City Foundry Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- L. E. Thompson, and Ruby Thompson v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1974