Legal Opinion

Estate of Nitto v. Commissioner

United States Tax Court

Decided November 30, 1949No. Docket Nos. 8840, 8841, 8842PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION.

Kern, Judge:(1) As to the deficiency in taxes determined for the year 1935, its assessment is barred by the statute of limitations unless fraud with intent to evade tax can be shown. Consequently, it is incumbent upon respondent to prove fraud in that year in order to prevail not only as to the penalty, but also as to the removal of the bar of the statute of limitations from the deficiency itself. With reference to the deficiencies in taxes for other years herein involved, the burden of proof is upon petitioner, although the burden, of course, is upon respondent as to the fraud…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Helvering v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  2. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  3. Commissioner v. WilcoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  4. Hornstein v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1944
  5. Muller v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1948

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. McSpadden v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1968
  2. Swiren v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950
  3. United States v. RutkinCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
  4. Bloch v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1966
  5. Finestone v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 1960

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API