Cheshire v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
P and H filed a joint 1992 Federal income tax return on which a portion of retirement distribution proceeds H received and interest received from a joint bank account were omitted from gross income.
Read the full summary
P and H filed a joint 1992 Federal income tax return on which a portion of retirement distribution proceeds H received and interest received from a joint bank account were omitted from gross income. Although P acknowledges that when she signed the joint return she had actual knowledge of the omitted retirement distribution proceeds, she posits that, relying on H's false statements, she had reason to believe that the omitted retirement distribution proceeds were not taxable and that she should be entitled to relief under sec. 6015(b), (c), and/or (f), I.R.C., with respect thereto. Further, P…
1DissentParr, J.
I have joined with Judge Colvin in his dissenting opinion, because I believe the language of section 6015(c)(3)(C) is ambiguous and that we should consult legislative history for guidance in resolving that ambiguity. I write separately only to express my concern about the Court’s application of section 6013(e) case law to the case at hand.
Section 6015 is a remedial statute; therefore, its provisions should be construed and applied liberally in favor of those whom the statute was designed to benefit. Cf. Helvering v. Bliss, 293 U.S. 144, 150-151 (1934); Allen v. Commissioner, 514 F.2d 908, 915…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Robinson v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Helvering v. BlissSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Huntsberry v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1984
- Jennie Allen v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
- Charlton v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2000
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.