Chertkof v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held: Respondent has established that there was a circumstance of adjustment as described in sec. 1312(3)(A), I.R.C. 1954, and that petitioners maintained an inconsistent position within the ambit of sec. 1311(b)(1)(B). Accordingly, respondent is entitled to make the adjustment involved in this case for the year 1966, a year which would be otherwise barred by the statute of limitations.
Read the full summary
Held: Respondent has established that there was a circumstance of adjustment as described in sec. 1312(3)(A), I.R.C. 1954, and that petitioners maintained an inconsistent position within the ambit of sec. 1311(b)(1)(B). Accordingly, respondent is entitled to make the adjustment involved in this case for the year 1966, a year which would be otherwise barred by the statute of limitations. Petitioners' motion for summary judgment under Rule 121 that assessment and collection of a deficiency for that year is barred is accordingly denied.
1Opinion of the Court
Dawson, Chief Judge:
This motion for summary judgment was assigned to and heard by Special Trial Judge Randolph F. Caldwell, Jr. The Court agrees with and adopts his opinion which is set out below.1
OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE
Caldwell, Special Trial Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in the income tax of Jack 0. and Sophie Chertkof (hereinafter referred to as petitioners) for the calendar year 1966 in the amount of $229,390.71. This case is presently before the Court on petitioners’ motion for summary judgment on the ground that respondent is barred by the statute of limitations…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Helvering v. FullerSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Yagoda v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1962
- United States v. Ed RachalCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- Herbert Birchenough and Edith Birchenough v. The United States. John J. Hurtz and Julia R. Hurtz v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969
- Priest Trust v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1946
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Jack O. Chertkof and Sophie Chertkof v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1981
- Chertkof v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1979
- Estate of Kappel v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1978
- Fruit of the Loom v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1994
- Estate of Kappel v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.