Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

5 B.T.A. 1026

Harris v. Commissioner

United States Board of Tax Appeals

Decided January 10, 1927

United States Board of Tax Appeals · decided 1927-01-10

The petitioner filed his return for the year 1923. Held: that inasmuch as the Commissioner had determined a total tax liability in excess of the amount shown on the original return to be due, there was a deficiency and that the Board had jurisdiction.

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“* * * We have heretofore held that the original return is the return required by law and that there is no statutory authority for the making or acceptance of an amended return. Appeal of National Refilling Co., 1 B. T. A. 236; Appeal of Mabel Elevator Co., 2 B. T. A. 517. The return referred to in section 273 of the Revenue Act of 1924 is the original return — the return which starts the tolling of the statute.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Powell Coal Co. v. Commissioner

Relies on Mabel Elevator Co. v. Commissioner · National Refining Co. v. Commissioner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1927-01-10

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1969

3019271930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*1028OPINION.

Green:

¶2This appeal was heard on the Commissioner’s motion to withdraw his answer filed December 11, 1925, and to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. It is the contention of the Commissioner that the petitioner on or about October 27, 1924, filed an amended return for 1923; that the tax of which the petitioner was notified by the letter of August 28, 1925, is admitted on the return as amended; and that the tax so admitted is not a deficiency within the meaning of section 273 of the Revenue Act of 1924.

¶3We have heretofore held that the original return is the return required by law and that there is no statutory authority for the making or acceptance of an amended return. Appeal of National Refining Co., 1 B. T. A. 236; Appeal of Mabel Elevator Co., 2 B. T. A. 517. The return referred to in section 273 of the Revenue Act of 1924 is the original return — the return which starts the tolling of the statute.

¶4On these facts, it appears that the Commissioner has determined that the correct amount of the tax is in excess of the tax admitted to be due by the taxpayer on his return, and under section 273 of the Revenue Act of 1924 such excess, no adjustments having been previously made, is a deficiency. The motion of the Commissioner is denied and the appeal is restored to the general calendar for hearing in due course.

/5/bta/1026 · .json · Public domain