Grosshandler v. Commissioner

1954 T.C. Memo. 13, 13 T.C.M. 383, 1954 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 232
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedApril 20, 1954
DocketDocket Nos. 16344, 16366, 16368, 16369, 16372.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1954 T.C. Memo. 13 (Grosshandler 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
Grosshandler v. Commissioner, 1954 T.C. Memo. 13, 13 T.C.M. 383, 1954 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 232 (tax 1954).

Opinion

Alexander Grosshandler, as Transferee of Beaumart, Incorporated, et al. 1a v. Commissioner, Respondent.
Grosshandler v. Commissioner
Docket Nos. 16344, 16366, 16368, 16369, 16372.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1954-13; 1954 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 232; 13 T.C.M. (CCH) 383; T.C.M. (RIA) 54119;
April 20, 1954. Filed
Max Berkowitz, 2450 Main Street, Bridgeport, Conn., pro se, in Docket No. 16368. Harry Grosshandler, 307 Lincoln Avenue, Bridgeport, Conn., pro se, in Docket No. 16369. Joseph Landis, Esq., for the respondent.

RAUM

Memorandum Findings of Fact and Opinion

The Commissioner determined deficiencies in income tax and additions to tax for fraud with intent to evade tax as follows:

Addition
Docket No.YearDeficiencyto tax
16366Estate of Samuel1942$ 55,680.62$ 27,840.31
Grosshandler, Deceased,
Clarice Neumann, Ad-
ministratrix194375,456.1537,728.08
He also determined that the following were liable as transferees of the assets of Beaumart, Incorporated for the amounts listed below and interest thereon:
Docket No.Liability
16372Estate of Samuel Gross-$ 223,266.03
handler, Deceased, Clarice plus claim
Neumann, Administratrix for increased
liability of
$ 10,852.34
2
16344Alexander Grosshandler$ 69,415.83
16368Max Berkowitz2,060.00
16369Harry Grosshandler15,701.29

*234 The issues are:

1. Is any part of the deficiency due from Samuel Grosshandler for each of the calendar years 1942 and 1943 3 due to fraud with intent to evade tax?

2. Did the respondent err in failing to apply the forgiveness provisions of the Current Tax Payment Act of 1943 in determining the liability of Samuel Grosshandler for the years 1942 and 1943?

3. Are the petitioners*235 in Docket Nos. 16344, 16368, 16369 and 16372 liable at law or in equity as transferees of the assets of Beaumart, Incorporated, in respect of the taxes and additions to tax due from Beaumart, Incorporated, for the calendar year 1942 and the taxable period January 1, to July 31, 1943? 4

Findings of Fact

Samuel Grosshandler was a resident of Bridgeport, Connecticut. His income tax returns for the calendar years 1942 and 1943 were filed with the collector of internal revenue for the district of Connecticut. He died on February 17, 1953, and on April 17, 1953, Clarice Neumann qualified as administratrix of his estate.

Alexander Grosshandler is a resident of Los Angeles, California. Max Berkowitz and Harry Grosshandler are residents of Bridgeport, Connecticut.

Beaumart, Incorporated (hereinafter referred*236 to as "Beaumart") was a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Connecticut. At all times material herein it was engaged in the business of bottling and rectifying whiskey. From October, 1935, until Beaumart's existence ceased in 1943, Samuel Grosshandler (hereinafter referred to as "Samuel") was its treasurer and conducted the affairs of the corporation. Its income, declared value excess profits and excess profits tax returns for the calendar year 1942 and for the taxable period January 1 to July 31, 1943, were filed with the collector of internal revenue for the district of Connecticut. These returns were signed by Samuel Grosshandler, as treasurer. Beaumart's existence terminated on July 31, 1943.

In May, 1942, Beaumart sold to Mark D. Leff certain whiskey warehouse receipts for $ 20,762.99. Collection of the sales price was effected by a sight draft in that amount drawn by Beaumart on Leff.

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

Related

Rowen v. Commissioner
18 T.C. 874 (U.S. Tax Court, 1952)
Burdick v. Commissioner
24 B.T.A. 1297 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1954 T.C. Memo. 13, 13 T.C.M. 383, 1954 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grosshandler-v-commissioner-tax-1954.