Opinion · United States Tax Court

Glinske v. Commissioner

17 T.C. 562

Type
Opinion
Court
United States Tax Court
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1951-09-28
Topic
general

OPINION. Rice, Judge: The question presented requires an interpretation of section 165 (b), Internal Revenue Code,1 and an application of the law to facts that are not in dispute. Petitioner contends that Congress, in writing section 165 (b), “intended the forepart thereof to cover the case of a distributee still joined with the service and the latter part thereof to cover the case of a distributee separated from the service (whether through discontinued plan or resignation or discharge the circumstances are entirely alike) and to preclude treatment of any proceeds whatsoever as gross income, since * * He argues that the forepart of section 165 (b) states that the amount distributed shall be taxed as if it were an annuity, which is not includible in gross income under section 22 (b), I. R. C., and that the latter part of section 165 (h) states that the amount distributed shall be considered a gain from the sale or exchange of a capital asset held for more than 6 months.

Citator

Cited by
30 opinions