US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

BURNET V. PORTER, 283 U. S. 230 (1931)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 283 U. S. 230 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Burnet v. Porter, 283 U.S. 230 (1931)

Burnet v. Porter

No. 203

Argued March 12, 1931

Decided April 13, 1931

283 U.S. 230




1. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue, after approving a deduction for loss in an income tax return and allowing a claim for refund of the proportional part of the tax, had authority to reopen the case later, disallow the deduction and redetermine the tax.

2. Decided, as respects proof of deductible loss, upon the authority of Burnet v. Houston, ante, p. 283 U. S. 223.

39 F.2d 360 reversed.

Certiorari, 282 U.S. 821, to review a judgment which reversed a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, 13 B.T.A. 279, sustaining disallowance of a deduction for a loss in an income tax return. chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 283 U. S. 231

MR. JUSTICE SUTHERLAND delivered the opinion of the Court.

William W. Porter was a subscriber in the sum of $75,000 to the fund described in our opinion handed down this day in No.199, Burnet v. Houston, ante, p. 283 U. S. 223. The facts in the present case are the same except that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue first approved the deduction and allowed a claim for refund of the proportional part of the tax, and then some time later reopened the case, disallowed the deduction, and redetermined the tax. The Court of Appeals sustained the power of the Commissioner upon the authority of McIlhenny v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 356, and was clearly right in doing so. That court, however, upon the main point, following its decision in the Houston case, reversed the determination of the Board of Tax Appeals in favor of the government. 39 F.2d 360. This is contrary to our decision in the Houston case, and, upon that authority, the judgment is reversed.

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™