Vannaman v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, proof that petitioner-husband filed fraudulent joint returns and that part of the underpayments of tax was due to his fraud is sufficient to invoke the provisions of secs. 6501(c)(1) and 6653(b), I.R.C. 1954, against the joint-filing petitioner-wife, even in the absence of proof of fraud on her part.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Since the returns were filed more than 3 years prior to the date of mailing the notice of deficiency, the deficiencies are barred under section 6501(a)5 unless respondent can show that each of petitioners’ joint returns was a “false or fraudulent return with the intent to evade tax” within the meaning of section 6501(c) (l).6 And, of course, in order to sustain the additions to tax under section 6653 (b) ,7 respondent must establish fraud.
Petitioners — who filed separate petitions, were represented by separate counsel, and filed separate briefs — did not testify on their own behalf or…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Otsuki v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
- Condor Merritt v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- William J. Drieborg and Laura D. Drieborg v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, William J. Drieborg v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1955
- Shaw v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1956
- George Schwarzkopf v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1957
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by94 opinions
- Stone v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1971
- Benjamin v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1976
- Jack Ballard and Mary Ballard v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1984
- Estate of Klein v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1975
- Estate of Clarke v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
89 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.