Court Opinion

ID: 9447298
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 22:31:14.658995+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:58.747126
License: Public Domain

JONES, Chief Judge,
with whom LITTLETON, Judge (ret.) joins (concurring in part).
Since our finding 53 establishes the fact that plaintiff did not report as income the amount it ultimately realized from the disposition of the flower marks, the sum so realized should be deducted from any recovery that is allowed for the loss incurred. The loss was sustained and the deduction is sought for the year 1945.
The marks which plaintiff had received were actually used for the payment of expenses during the four subsequent years. Since in those subsequent years plaintiff was no longer in the flower business, the marks were manifestly used in the payment of expenses that were in no way connected with the flower business out of which the claimed loss arose.
The plaintiff reported the interest on the Deutsche mark balances. This interest was included by plaintiff in reporting its gross income for Federal tax purposes, but it apparently did not report as income the finally realized value of the marks themselves.
I can see no valid reason why the Government should not be permitted to recoup the amount the plaintiff finally realized on the disposition of these marks in the payment of obligations that were related in no way to the business in connection with which the claimed loss was incurred.
The plaintiff must show the amount realized directly or indirectly from these marks in order to establish the net loss it sustained.
Unless plaintiff is able to show that it reported its income from the area involved for the four years mentioned and in reporting such income for the same period did not take as a deduction the expenses that were settled by the use of the marks, the recoupment or offset should be allowed. The burden is on the plaintiff to make this showing, otherwise the amount is ultimately received even though received in later years should be taken into consideration in now making refund for loss in the year 1945, and the entire matter thus adjusted on a basis that is fair to both sides.