Jockey Club v. Commissioner
United States Board of Tax Appeals
1. Petitioner was not "organized and operated exclusively" for any one or more of the purposes which, under the applicable statutes, give a tax-exempt status.
Read the full summary
1. Petitioner was not "organized and operated exclusively" for any one or more of the purposes which, under the applicable statutes, give a tax-exempt status. Held, petitioner is not exempt from income tax, and dues paid by its members are includable in its gross income. 2. Petitioner failed to file a proper income tax return for 1927 until December 9, 1929. Held, the deficiency notice mailed November 21, 1932, was timely, and petitioner's tax liability for 1927 is not barred by the statute of limitations. 3. Where petitioner, which had in good faith claimed a taxexempt status and was…
1Opinion of the Court
THE JOCKEY CLUB, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.
Jockey Club v. Commissioner
Docket Nos. 63181, 68664.
United States Board of Tax Appeals
30 B.T.A. 670; 1934 BTA LEXIS 1285;
May 11, 1934, Promulgated
1. Petitioner was not "organized and operated exclusively" for any one or more of the purposes which, under the applicable statutes, give a tax-exempt status. Held, petitioner is not exempt from income tax, and dues paid by its members are includable in its gross income.
2. Petitioner failed to file a proper income tax return for 1927 until December 9, 1929. Held, the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Weiss v. StearnSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Grannan v. . Westchester Racing Assn.New York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Clement Gunn v. The United States of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Charles E. Pearsall & Son v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
- Jockey Club v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.