Court Opinion

ID: 6803318
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-23 18:43:49.705799+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:03:19.855957
License: Public Domain

*197OPINION.
Trammell:
There are two questions presented for decision. (1) Whether the amount agreed to be paid to the officers was reasonable compensation for services, and (2) whether it was paid or was an obligation incurred during the respective years.
The officers were to receive a commission of 15 per cent on the sales as compensation, but were not to draw out in excess of $100 per week each, in 1919, and $200 per week each, in 1920. We have no evidence as to the amount of sales made by either of the officers or the amount of commission they were entitled to. There is no evidence as to whether it equaled the amount they were permitted to draw out or not, nor is there any evidence as to the amounts actually drawn by the officers. The Commissioner has allowed as a deduction the amount shown by the return as the compensation of the members. We can not, on this evidence, find that the determination of the Commissioner was not correct, although the amount of the commission agreed to be paid the officers was reasonable compensation.

Jvdgment will be entered .for the Commissioner.