Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 B.T.A. 1095

Barry v. Commissioner

United States Board of Tax Appeals

Decided October 28, 1925

United States Board of Tax Appeals · decided 1925-10-28

1. Advances made to a corporation and expenditures made in its behalf by a director during several years, allowed as deductions from the director's gross income in 1921 when the corporation ceased all activity, it having no assets at that time. 2. Deductions claimed for bad debts, allowed in part and disallowed in part.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 1927

Relies on Bickley v. Commissioner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1925-10-28

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*1098OPINION.

Graupner:

¶2The taxpayer has established to our satisfaction advances made to the Lenox Producing Corporation and expenditures made on its behalf in the amount of $4,733.79, as set forth in the findings above, which he is entitled to deduct for the year 1921 in which the corporation ceased operations without assets.

¶3The corporation having ceased all activity in 1921 and having no assets, we conclude that the taxpayer should properly be allowed his claimed deduction of $1,000 paid for capital stock of the corporation. Appeal of Milton H. Bickley, 1 B. T. A. 544.

¶4Of the claimed loss on account of bad debts, we are of the opinion that the taxpayer is entitled to deduct the balance of the loans to J. W. Hum and Lem Tong amounting to $105. The evidence in regard to the loan to Jane Grogan is to the effect that she did not leave Los Angeles until after 1921 and we are not satisfied that the taxpayer definitely ascertained the debt to be uncollectible in 1921.

/2/bta/1095 · .json · Public domain