Elwood v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, depreciation is not an expense paid for purposes of sec. 213, I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
Jesse B. Elwood and Rose L. Elwood, Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Elwood v. Commissioner
Docket No. 4172-76
United States Tax Court
72 T.C. 264; 1979 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 127;
April 30, 1979, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
Held, depreciation is not an expense paid for purposes of sec. 213, I.R.C. 1954.
Earl G. Stokes, for the petitioners.
Thomas F. Kelly, for the respondent.
Irwin, Judge.
IRWIN
OPINION
The respondent determined a deficiency of $ 350 in petitioners' joint Federal income tax for the calendar year 1974.
Due to concessions, the only issue remaining…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Aquilino v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Commissioner v. Idaho Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- W. Lawrence Oliver and Hazel P. Oliver v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1966
- Gordon v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1962
- Gerard v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1962
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.