Schlesinger v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Deductions allowed under section 214(a) of the Revenue Act of 1921, but not connected with the trade or business regularly carried on by the taxpayer and not specially considered in the method of calculation of the "net loss," as set out in section 204(a) of the same Act, must be subtracted from the total deductions allowed under section 214(a) before the calculation is made, so that the result of the calculation will be the "net loss" defined in section 204(a) of the Act.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Murdock:
We are satisfied that article 1601 of Regulations 62 is not in accordance with section 204(a) of the Revenue Act of 1921, because the article gives a double effect to deductible losses not sustained in a trade or business regularly carried on by the taxpayer. This double effect is not authorized or intended under section 204(a). The difficulty, however, is to make a calculation which is in accordance with this section and which will stand the- test in every case. If there is a possible interpretation of the Act which will give effect to the intent of Congress, of course it is…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Sportwear Hosiery Mills v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
- Goldberg v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1928
- Hartley v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Jones v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1930
- Montgomery v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.