Hill v. Commissioner case brief
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
181 F.2d 906, 1950 U.S. App. 50-1 U.S.
Tax Cas. (CCH) P9310; 39 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 435
CASE SYNOPSIS:
The Plaintiff taxpayer filed an action against defendant Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
The Plaintiff sought relief from a ruling that there was a deficiency in the income tax due for the calendar year 1945.
The Tax Court of the United States affirmed the ruling.
The taxpayer appealed.
FACTS:
The taxpayer with 27 years' teaching experience attended university classes and deducted the expenses on her federal tax return in order to retain her teaching certificate. The court reversed the lower court's decision and held that the tax deduction was allowed under 26 U.S.C.S. § 23(a)(1)(A). The court found that the commission held it against the taxpayer because she admitted that she enjoyed her courses and welcomed the opportunity to increase her teaching efficiency. Further, the court found that the renewal of the teaching certificate, already the highest granted, meant no further promotion and no added pay. The court concluded that the expenses incurred by the taxpayer fulfilled the letter and spirit of the law and were incurred in carrying on a trade or business, were ordinary and necessary, and were not personal in nature.
CONCLUSION:
The court reversed the lower court's ruling.
The case was remanded with instructions to allow the taxpayer as a deduction the expenses which she claimed on her tax return.
The Plaintiff taxpayer filed an action against defendant Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
The Plaintiff sought relief from a ruling that there was a deficiency in the income tax due for the calendar year 1945.
The Tax Court of the United States affirmed the ruling.
The taxpayer appealed.
FACTS:
The taxpayer with 27 years' teaching experience attended university classes and deducted the expenses on her federal tax return in order to retain her teaching certificate. The court reversed the lower court's decision and held that the tax deduction was allowed under 26 U.S.C.S. § 23(a)(1)(A). The court found that the commission held it against the taxpayer because she admitted that she enjoyed her courses and welcomed the opportunity to increase her teaching efficiency. Further, the court found that the renewal of the teaching certificate, already the highest granted, meant no further promotion and no added pay. The court concluded that the expenses incurred by the taxpayer fulfilled the letter and spirit of the law and were incurred in carrying on a trade or business, were ordinary and necessary, and were not personal in nature.
CONCLUSION:
The court reversed the lower court's ruling.
The case was remanded with instructions to allow the taxpayer as a deduction the expenses which she claimed on her tax return.
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
No comments:
Post a Comment