Taft v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. The initial payment of $50,000 on a contract purporting to be a lease with privilege to purchase, but executed to carry into effect an offer by the lessee to purchase the property of the lessor, and held to be a sale, is not amortizable over the years mentioned in the purported lease as deductible expense therefor. 2. Where no evidence is offered to establish alleged error of the Commissioner in reference to depreciation allowed, he is sustained.
1Opinion of the Court
*811OPINION.
Sea well:
We seek here to know and correctly to determine the true character and meaning of the transaction between the petitioner and Joseph R. Peebles’ Sons Company in reference to the lot in Cincinnati mentioned in the papers and other evidence olfered at the trial. It seems well settled that calling it a “ lease ” does not make it such, if, in fact, it is something else. Heryford v. Davis, 102 U. S. 235. “ Leases ” of personalty with the privilege of purchase are held conditional sales. Corbett v. Riddle, 209 Fed. 811; Burroughs Adding Machine Co. v. Bogdon, 9 Fed. (2d) 54; Hervey…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Weiss v. WeinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Heryford v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Hervey v. Rhode Island Locomotive WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Corbett v. RiddleCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1913
3Cited by12 opinions
- Walburga Oesterreich v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- Carter Publications, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- San Joaquin Fruit & Inv. Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- Alexander v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1958
- Berry v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1952
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.