Zarin v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
P, a compulsive gambler, gambled on credit extended by a New Jersey casino. During the following year, P and the casino settled the debt at a substantial discount. Held, the difference between the face amount of the debt and the amount for which it was settled constitutes income from the discharge of indebtedness. Sec. 61(a)(12), I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
David Zarin and Louise Zarin, Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Zarin v. Commissioner
Docket No. 21371-86
United States Tax Court
92 T.C. 1084; 1989 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 75; 92 T.C. No. 68;
May 22, 1989. May 22, 1989, Filed
Decision will be entered under Rule 155.
P, a compulsive gambler, gambled on credit extended by a New Jersey casino. During the following year, P and the casino settled the debt at a substantial discount. Held, the difference between the face amount of the debt and the amount for which it was settled constitutes income from the discharge of indebtedness.…
Also in this document: Dissent · Tannenwald; Dissent · Jacobs; Dissent · Ruwe.
2Cases cited49 opinions
- Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Richards v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Commissioner v. DubersteinSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Eisner v. MacOmberSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.