Continental Accounting & Audit Co. v. Commissioner

*762OPINION.

Ivins:1

We believe the decision of the division dismissing this appeal to have been erroneous. The basis of that decision was the proposition that there was no “ deficiency ” in tax involved, but that the Commissioner had merely rejected claims in abatement and proposed to collect the taxes shown on the taxpayer’s returns to be due. A “ deficiency,” as defined by section 273 of the Revenue Act of 1924, is:(1) The amount by which the tax imposed by this title exceeds the amount shown as the tax by the taxpayer upon his return; but the amount so shown on the return shall first be…