Leo Rice and Betty Rice v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Fifth Circuit

Leo Rice and Betty Rice v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

295 F.2d 239

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 17, 1961

Docket18973

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 295 F.2d 239 (Leo Rice and Betty Rice v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Leo Rice and Betty Rice v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 295 F.2d 239 (5th Cir. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Tax Court, by a memorandum opinion, held that the petitioners had understated their taxable income for the years 1943 to 1948, inclusive, and that the deficiencies, in part, for each of the years, were due to fraud with intent to evade tax. The petitioners bring the Tax Court’s determination before us for *240 review. The evidence sustains the fraud findings. In determining income by the net-worth basis, the Tax Court held that the evidence showed that the taxpayers did not, at the beginning of the tax period, have a hoard of cash on hand. The finding of the Tax Court is based upon inferences which it was fully justified in drawing from the evidence before it. The petitioners here urge that the statute of limitations has barred the assessment and collection of the tax deficiencies and penalties. The question was not raised by the pleadings and the Tax Court properly held that the Commissioner was under no burden to show that waivers or extensions had been made. We find no error in the Tax Court’s decision and its judgment is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The Tax Court, by a memorandum opinion, held that the petitioners had understated their taxable income for the years 1943 to 1948, inclusive, and that the deficiencies, in part, for each of the years, were due to fraud with intent to evade tax. The petitioners bring the Tax Court’s determination before us for *240 review. The evidence sustains the fraud findings. In determining income by the net-worth basis, the Tax Court held that the evidence showed that the taxpayers did not, at the beginning of the tax period, have a hoard of cash on hand. The finding of the Tax Court is based upon inferences which it was fully justified in drawing from the evidence before it. The petitioners here urge that the statute of limitations has barred the assessment and collection of the tax deficiencies and penalties. The question was not raised by the pleadings and the Tax Court properly held that the Commissioner was under no burden to show that waivers or extensions had been made. We find no error in the Tax Court’s decision and its judgment is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 F.2d 239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leo-rice-and-betty-rice-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue-ca5-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack