Canfield v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
1. Allocation of income between husband and wife determined, where both contributed capital and the husband contributed services to a business enterprise. 2. Held, imposition of negligence penalty not justified.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Van Fossan, Judge’.
The case before us presents the question whether the income from an alleged partnership between husband and wife is properly taxable to the husband or may be divided between them.
In Commissioner v. Tower, 327 U. S. 280, the Supreme Court stated:
* * * A partnership is generally said to be created when persons join together their money, goods, labor, or skill for the purpose of carrying on a trade, profession, or business and when there is community of interest in the profits and losses. When the existence of an alleged partnership arrangement is challenged by…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Commissioner v. TowerSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Drennen v. London Assurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1885
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hartz v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1948
- Stiefel v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1947
- Friedman v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Jennings v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948
- Canfield v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1946
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.