Beverly Clark Collection, LLC v. Cir

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided June 23, 2021·No. 20-70472·Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 23 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

BEVERLY CLARK COLLECTION, LLC, No. 20-70472 Nelson Clark, Tax Matters Partner Tax Ct. No. 27538-08

Petitioner-Appellee,

v. MEMORANDUM*

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Respondent-Appellant.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the of the United States Tax Court

Argued and Submitted June 7, 2021 Portland, Oregon

Before: WARDLAW, HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and BOLTON,** District Judge.

The Commissioner of Internal Revenue appeals the Tax Court’s summary judgment in favor of Beverly Clark Collection, LLC (“Petitioner”) on statute-of- limitations grounds. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1), and we review the Tax Court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. Sollberger v. Comm’r,

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

**

The Honorable Susan R. Bolton, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona, sitting by designation.

691 F.3d 1119, 1123 (9th Cir. 2012). We affirm.

The Tax Court properly granted summary judgment because the Commissioner’s Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment of Petitioner’s Form 1065 for tax year 2000 was issued outside of the applicable three-year limitations period in 26 U.S.C. § 6501(a). A six-year limitations period does not apply because Nelson and Beverly Clarks’ partial reporting of gain from the transaction at issue was not an “omi[ssion]” under 26 U.S.C. § 6501(e)(1)(A) (2000). See Colony, Inc. v. Comm’r, 357 U.S. 28, 32 (1958) (defining “omit” in predecessor statute as “[t]o leave out or unmentioned; not to insert, include, or name”); United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC, 566 U.S. 478, 482 (2012) (elaborating that “‘omit’ limits [§ 6501(e)(1)(A)]’s scope to situations in which specific receipts or accruals of income are left out of the computation of gross income”). We find unpersuasive the Commissioner’s attempt to distinguish Colony, Inc. and Home Concrete & Supply, LLC and also his invitation to rely on out-of-circuit authority predating Home Concrete & Supply, LLC.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Beverly Clark Collection, LLC v. Cir, (9th Cir. 2021).

Beverly Clark Collection, LLC v. Cir (Beverly Clark Collection, LLC v. Cir) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Colony, Inc. v. Commissioner
357 U.S. 28 (Supreme Court, 1958)
United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC
132 S. Ct. 1836 (Supreme Court, 2012)
Sollberger v. Commissioner
691 F.3d 1119 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)