Opinion · United States Board of Tax Appeals

Appeal of Estate of Pennell

Appeal of Est. of Pennell, 4 B.T.A. 1039 (B.T.A. 1926)

Type: Opinion
Court: United States Board of Tax Appeals
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1926-09-25
Topic: general

OPINION. SteRNhagen : The payment by an individual for general personal legal services, including the preparation of a will, are obviously not “ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred in the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business,” as provided in section 214(a) (1) of the Revenue Act of 1918. If any part thereof could be so classified the burden of allocation must be on the petitioner and not on the Board. We need not therefore discuss the question whether, since the payment of the entire bill of $20,000 was equally *1040divided as between 1920 and 1921 without any earmarking, the petitioner could properly allocate the $3,000 entirely to the first payment in 1920. Judgment for the Commissioner.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Appeal of Estate of Pennell. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 7 opinions

OPINION.

SteRNhagen :

The payment by an individual for general personal legal services, including the preparation of a will, are obviously not “ordinary and necessary expenses paid or incurred in the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business,” as provided in section 214(a) (1) of the Revenue Act of 1918. If any part thereof could be so classified the burden of allocation must be on the petitioner and not on the Board. We need not therefore discuss the question whether, since the payment of the entire bill of $20,000 was equally *1040 divided as between 1920 and 1921 without any earmarking, the petitioner could properly allocate the $3,000 entirely to the first payment in 1920.

Judgment for the Commissioner.