Canterman v. Commissioner

1980 T.C. Memo. 474, 41 T.C.M. 248, 1980 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 113
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedOctober 22, 1980
DocketDocket No. 624-77.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1980 T.C. Memo. 474 (Canterman v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Canterman v. Commissioner, 1980 T.C. Memo. 474, 41 T.C.M. 248, 1980 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 113 (tax 1980).

Opinion

SAMUEL CANTERMAN AND RAE CANTERMAN, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Canterman v. Commissioner
Docket No. 624-77.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1980-474; 1980 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 113; 41 T.C.M. (CCH) 248; T.C.M. (RIA) 80474;
October 22, 1980, Filed
Gerard Anderson, for the petitioners.
Milton J. Carter, Jr., for the respondent.

GOFFE

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

GOFFE, Judge: The Commissioner determined deficiencies in petitioners' Federal income tax and additions to tax under section 6653(b), Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 1 for the taxable years 1968 and 1969 as follows:

TaxableDeficiencyAddition to Tax
Yearin TaxSec. 6653(b)
1968$20,013.81$10,006.91
196912,667.666,333.83

The issues for decision are:

(1) whether petitioners*114 failed to report income for their taxable years 1968 and 1969 in the amounts determined by respondent; 2 and

(2) whether for either of those taxable years there was an underpayment of tax any part of which was due to fraud.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated. The stipulation of facts and attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference.

Petitioners Samuel and Rae Canterman, husband and wife, timely filed joint Federal income tax returns for their taxable years 1968 and 1969. At the time they filed their petition herein petitioners resided in Tucson, Arizona.

During 1968 and 1969, Samuel Canterman (hereinafter petitioner) was engaged in the business of wholesale and retail sale of phonograph records and phonograph supplies in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He was the owner of a sole proprietorship known as Empire Distributing*115 Company.

Petitioners' returns for 1968 and 1969 were prepared by a public accountant based on all the records of income and expenses that petitioners provided him.

During 1968 petitioner received gross income of $72,808.90 from the sale of phonograph records and supplies. This amount was computed as follows:

CustomerAmount
Sterling Distributing Co.$70,487.90
Florence Perry Record Shop2,321.00 3
TOTAL$72,808.90

Petitioners reported $19,580.66 of this amount on their 1968 return; thus, they understated their gross sales income by $53,228.24.

During 1969 petitioner received gross income from the sale of phonograph records and supplies and commission income totaling $50,583.99. This amount was computed as follows:

CustomerAmount
Sterling Distribution Co.$29,050.10
Florence Perry Record Shop1,716.55
Commission Income (Disc Records)5,307.84
National Record Mart, Inc.,
(Frank Fischer)14,509.50 4
TOTAL$50,583.99

Petitioners*116 reported $14,321.24 of this amount on their 1969 return; thus, they understated their gross sales income and commission income by the amount of $36,262.75.

Petitioner's business did not have greater costs in 1968 and 1969 for goods sold than the amounts reported on petitioners' returns for those years. Petitioner gave Frank Fischer, the representative of National Record Mart, Inc., a receipt only for the first of several sales made to that company during 1969.

Petitioner Samuel Canterman was indicted for violation of section 7206(1) based on his alleged willful filing of false and fraudulent returns for 1968 and 1969. He pleaded guilty to the count for 1968 and the remaining count was dismissed. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment and two years probation (the execution of the prison sentence being suspended) and was fined $4,000.

The Commissioner determined deficiencies in petitioners' Federal income tax for their taxable years 1968 and 1969 based upon the above-mentioned understatements of income. He further determined additions to tax for both years under

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

Related

Welch v. Helvering
290 U.S. 111 (Supreme Court, 1933)
Spies v. United States
317 U.S. 492 (Supreme Court, 1943)
Holland v. United States
348 U.S. 121 (Supreme Court, 1955)
Wichita Term. El. Co. v. Commissioner of Int. R.
162 F.2d 513 (Tenth Circuit, 1947)
Mitchell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
118 F.2d 308 (Fifth Circuit, 1941)
Otsuki v. Commissioner
53 T.C. 96 (U.S. Tax Court, 1969)
Stone v. Commissioner
56 T.C. 213 (U.S. Tax Court, 1971)
Considine v. Commissioner
68 T.C. 52 (U.S. Tax Court, 1977)
Goodwin v. Commissioner
73 T.C. 215 (U.S. Tax Court, 1979)
Schwarzkopf v. Commissioner
1956 T.C. Memo. 155 (U.S. Tax Court, 1956)
Foster v. Comm'r
1965 T.C. Memo. 246 (U.S. Tax Court, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1980 T.C. Memo. 474, 41 T.C.M. 248, 1980 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/canterman-v-commissioner-tax-1980.