The First National Bank of La Feria v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- First Nat'l Bank v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1965)
- First Commercial Bank v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1965)
- Union National Bank of Youngstown v. United States (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1965)
- Northern Bank v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1962)
- Boardwalk Nat'l Bank v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1960)
- Dan W. Clark, Inc. v. James Co. (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 1991)
- Carp v. Commissioner (United States Tax Court 1961)
- American State Bank, a Wisconsin Banking Corporation v. United States of America, (Two Cases) (7th Cir. 1960)
- American State Bank v. United States (District Court, E.D. Wisconsin 1959)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
This petition attacks as erroneous the finding and decision of the Tax Court 1 sustaining the commissioner’s disallowance of a part of the amounts claimed by petitioner, under Mimeograph No. 6209, issued Dec. 8, 1947, as deductions, for the years 1947 and 1948, under Section 23 (k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, 26 U.S.C.A. § 23(k), for reasonable additions to its reserve for bad debts.
The claim made by petitioner below, and there disallowed, was that the commissioner acted arbitrarily, or unreasonably, or, at any rate, without authority of law in, first authorizing petitioner to use the bad debt experience of a substituted bank instead of its own, and later, disallowing the deduction based on that experience, requiring petitioner to use, and base its deduction claim on, its own experience.
The claim it makes here is that the Tax Court erred in holding that the petitioner did not show that in so doing respondent acted unreasonably and arbitrarily.
We cannot agree with this claim. On the contrary, we find ourselves in agreement with the commissioner that the findings and conclusion of the tax court fairly and fully state the facts and as fairly and fully canvas and deal with the contentions of petitioners and state and apply to them the applicable law. Without, therefore, further stating our reasons for doing so, we find it sufficient to declare that, upon the considerations advanced and the reasons given in the Tax Court’s opinion, its judgment was right and should be affirmed.
Affirmed.
. 24 T.C. 429.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.