Grandin v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
Amounts paid by the trustees of a trust to attorneys for services in prosecuting a claim for refund of taxes, held, preperly deductible in computing the net income of the trust.
1Opinion of the Court
*516OPINIOH.
MaRqtostte :
This proceeding presents but a single issue, namely, Did the respondent, under the circumstances set forth above, err in including in each petitioner’s income the amount of $1,144, repre*517senting one-fifth of the fees paid by the trustees to attorneys for recovering excessive estate taxes paid by the estate of Elijah Bishop Grandin? However, the basic question is, Was the amount paid by the trustees to the attorneys for prosecuting the claim for refund of Federal estate taxes a proper deduction in computing the net income of the trust? If it was a proper deduction, it is…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Flint v. Stone Tracy Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Von Baumbach v. Sargent Land Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- The Parker Mills v. . the Commissioners of TaxesNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
3Cited by9 opinions
- Umsted v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Adair v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1941
- Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1929
- Grandin v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1929
- Hales-Mullaly, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1942
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.