Case: Phoenix Development Co., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Abbreviation: Phoenix Development Co. v. Commissioner
Decision Date: 1928-09-19
Docket Number: Docket No. 12672
Citation: 13 B.T.A. 414
Volume: 13
Reporter: Reports of the United States Board of Tax Appeals
Court: United States Board of Tax Appeals
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Phoenix Development Co., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent.
Judges: 
Pages: 414–415

Head Matter:
Phoenix Development Co., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent.
Docket No. 12672.
Promulgated September 19, 1928.
Monte M. Lemccnn, Esq., for the petitioner.
T. M. Mather, Esq., for the respondent.

Opinion:
OFINION.
Littleton:
Similar questions have been decided by this Board, and in accordance with our previous opinions on the same subject, we hold that the Commissioner committed no error in disallowing as he did the deduction of which petitioner complains.
The cost of defending title to property is a capital expenditure. North American Oil Consolidated, 12 B. T. A. 68; Holeproof Hosiery Co., 11 B. T. A. 547; Bugher, et al., Executors, 9 B. T. A. 1155; West End Consolidated Mining Co., 3 B. T. A. 128; Consolidated Mutual Oil Co., 2 B. T. A. 1067; Laemmle v. Eisner, 275 Fed. 504; 2 Am. Fed. Tax Rep. 1525.
Judgment will be entered for the respondent.