Ramos v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Expense vs. Capital Expenditure -- Payment by Life Tenant To Settle Litigation Attacking His Title to Life Estate -- Sec. 212(2), I.R.C. 1954. -- A payment by one granted right to trust income for life in settlement of litigation in which his right or title was attacked is not an ordinary and necessary expense and not deductible under section 212(2), I.R.C. 1954.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Murdock, Judge:
The Commissioner determined a deficiency of $9,753.19 in income tax of the petitioners for 1954. The facts have been presented by a stipulation which is adopted as the findings of fact.
The petitioners, husband and wife, filed their joint return with the director of internal revenue for the Lower Manhattan District of New York.
The only issue for decision is whether $20,000 paid by Arturo in 1954 to Pauline V. Hoving is deductible under section 212(2), I.R.C. 1954, as an ordinary and necessary expense for the conservation or maintenance of property held for the production…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Lykes v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Louisiana Land & Exploration Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1946
- Bowers v. LumpkinCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1944
- Louisiana Land & Exp. Co. v. Commissioner of Int. Rev.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1947
- Safety Tube Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Rev.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1948
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bertram v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1978
- Estate of McCauley v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1965
- KELCE v. COMMISSIONERUnited States Tax Court · 1978
- Lucas v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1966
- Ramos v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1962