Watson v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. Where a statute is clear and unambiguous in its terms and provisions, resort should not be had to legislative history to determine the limits of its compass. 2. The words "sale or exchange" used in section 101(c)(2) of the Revenue Act of 1928, being ordinary words of well established meaning, are to be so interpreted in applying the section to any given transaction. 3. Payment of the amount specified in a bond, either at maturity or pursuant to an authorized call prior to…
Read the full summary
1. Where a statute is clear and unambiguous in its terms and provisions, resort should not be had to legislative history to determine the limits of its compass. 2. The words "sale or exchange" used in section 101(c)(2) of the Revenue Act of 1928, being ordinary words of well established meaning, are to be so interpreted in applying the section to any given transaction. 3. Payment of the amount specified in a bond, either at maturity or pursuant to an authorized call prior to maturity, is not a "sale or exchange" of such bond. It is merely the payment of an obligation according to its fixed…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Van Fossan :
This proceeding was brought for the redetermination of a deficiency in income tax for the year 1928 amounting to $759.89. By his amended answer the respondent alleges that the deficiency is *464the sum of $1,243.51 instead of $759.89, shown in the notice of deficiency, and requests that the deficiency be so redetermined.
A stipulation of facts was entered into by the parties disposing of all the issues except two, stated as follows:(a) Whether the loss of $984.38 sustained by the petitioner in the year 1928, as hereinafter set forth, is a capital loss or an ordinary loss.(b)…
2Cited by41 opinions
- Hale v. HelveringCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1936
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. J. I. Morgan and Frances MorganCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959
- Rogers v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
- Harry Rosen and Rose Rosen v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1961
- United States v. FairbanksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.