Case: Harris Hyman, Jr., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent; Helen E. Hyman, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent
Abbreviation: Hyman v. Commissioner
Decision Date: 1941-07-29
Docket Number: Docket Nos. 101106, 101107
Citation: 44 B.T.A. 1122
Volume: 44
Reporter: Reports of the United States Board of Tax Appeals
Court: United States Board of Tax Appeals
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Harris Hyman, Jr., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent. Helen E. Hyman, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent.
Judges: 
Pages: 1122–1123

Head Matter:
Harris Hyman, Jr., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent. Helen E. Hyman, Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent.
Docket Nos. 101106, 101107.
Promulgated July 29, 1941.
Robert G. Polack, Esq., for the petitioners.
Donald P. Moyers, Esq., for the respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION.
Murdock:
The petitioners must show that the payments come within some provision Of the statute allowing a deduction. New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U. S. 435, 440. This they have failed to do. If the seats were used in a business regularly carried on by them, the cases cited would be in point. Carrying charges, such as interest and taxes, are deductible because there is a specific statutory provision allowing them. But there is no such provision covering these dues. The record does not show that the petitioners had any business of which these were an ordinary and necessary expense. Higgins v. Commissioner, 312 U. S. 212.
Decision will be entered, for the respondent.