From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weil v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Nov 11, 1937
92 F.2d 1022 (6th Cir. 1937)

Opinion

No. 7141.

November 11, 1937.

Appeal from Decision of the Board of Tax Appeals.

A. Shelby Winstead and Charles I. Dawson, both of Louisville, Ky., for petitioner.

Frank J. Wideman, Robert H. Jackson, Sewall Key, Arthur W. Carnduff, James W. Morris, and John G. Remey, all of Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Before SIMONS and ALLEN, Circuit Judges, and DRUFFEL, District Judge.


Affirmed on authority of Southern Abstract Loan Co. v. Commissioner, 72 F.2d 130 (C.C.A.6). See, also, Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. United States, 288 U.S. 269, 273, 53 S.Ct. 337, 77 L.Ed. 739; Moran v. Commissioner, 67 F.2d 601, (C.C.A.1); Commissioner v. Moore, 48 F.2d 526, for principles applicable. There was no error in refusing to receive amended return, since proofs thereunder, if made, would result in duplication of deductions. It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Weil v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
Nov 11, 1937
92 F.2d 1022 (6th Cir. 1937)
Case details for

Weil v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Case Details

Full title:Jonas WEIL, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent

Court:Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Date published: Nov 11, 1937

Citations

92 F.2d 1022 (6th Cir. 1937)

Citing Cases

Commissioner of Int. Rev. v. Laguna Ld. W

" On the contrary, the taxpayer is required to treat each parcel sold as a separate capital transaction…

Commissioner, Internal v. George M. Jones

C.M. 12581, C.B. XIII-1, p. 142. It was asserted that, in all these directions, the rule was recognized as…