Anderson v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, Docket No. 16492.
Decision Date | 23 November 1948 |
Docket Number | Docket No. 16492. |
Citation | 11 T.C. 841 |
Parties | STANLEY A. ANDERSON, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. |
Court | U.S. Tax Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
All of petitioner's tax liability asserted in a letter purporting to be a notice of deficiency having been paid before the mailing thereof, held that the absence of any ‘deficiency‘ within the meaning of Internal Revenue Code, section 271(a), deprives this Court of jurisdiction, requiring dismissal of the proceeding. Hartford Allen, Esq., and John E. Mahoney, Esq., for the respondent.
The petition purports to challenge a deficiency in income tax said to have been determined in the year 1943 in the amount of $1,097.08. Petitioner filed the return here involved with the collector for the fifth district of New Jersey.
Although neither petitioner nor anyone representing him appeared to prosecute the case, a hearing was held, and upon the evidence so taken respondent filed a motion to dismiss the proceeding for lack of jurisdiction.
The records of the office of the collector of internal revenue for the fifth district of New Jersey in respect to income and estimated tax of petitioner for the years 1942 and 1943 indicate the following:
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Paid, Abated, or ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Credited ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+------------------------+--------------------¦ ¦1. ¦2. ¦3. Acct. ¦4. ¦5. Date ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Taxable¦List¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦Period ¦and ¦No. or ¦Amount ¦or ¦6. ¦7. ¦8. Adjustment ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Paid ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦ ¦Year¦Page ¦Assessed¦Schedule¦Amount ¦Ab., ¦of ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Cr. ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦and Line ¦ ¦No. ¦ ¦ ¦Overassess. ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦1942 ¦1943¦706442 ¦488.90 ¦3/15/43 ¦488.90 ¦Pd. ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦1943 ¦1943¦3066262 ¦2,603.28¦9/15/43 ¦2,603.28¦Pd. ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦ES ¦ ¦7007679 ¦6,476.43¦12/15/43¦6,476.43¦Pd. ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦1943 ¦1944¦NA-770007¦ ¦2/12/45 ¦1,586.22¦Refund¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦71.01 ¦Int. ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦1,657.23¦ ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦1943 ¦1946¦Mar-15 ¦656.41 ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ +-------+----+---------+--------+--------+--------+------+--------------------¦ ¦ ¦ ¦519000 ¦76.56 ¦4/9/46 ¦732.97 ¦Pd. ¦1040-770007 Int. to ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Int ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦Feb. 25, 1946. ¦...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Penn Mut. Indem. Co. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
...actually determined a ‘deficiency’ within the meaning of section 271(a), include: New York Trust Co. et al., 3 B.T.A. 583, 587; Stanley A. Anderson, 11 T.C. 841; McConkey v. Commissioner, 199 F.2d 892, 894 (C.A. 4), affirming an order of dismissal of this Court, certiorari denied 345 U.S.92......
-
Estate of Maceo v. Commissioner, Docket No. 55506
...of his position, petitioner relies upon McConkey v. Commissioner 52-2 USTC ¶ 9537, 199 F. 2d 892 (C. A. 4, 1952); Stanley A. Anderson Dec. 16,692, 11 T. C. 841 (1948); Bendheim v. Commissioner 54-2 USTC ¶ 9446 214 F. 2d 26 (C. A. 2, 1954) and Raoul Walsh Dec. 20,239, 21 T. C. 1063 (1954). W......
-
Naftel v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
...of deficiency is erroneously issued after payment of the tax. Bendheim v. Commissioner, 214 F.2d 26, 28 (2d Cir. 1954); Anderson v. Commissioner, 11 T.C. 841, 843 (1948). 14 We have jurisdiction to decide not only whether the Commissioner's determination of a deficiency was correct, but als......
-
Conklin v. C.I.R.
...cert. denied, 345 U.S. 924, 73 S.Ct. 782, 97 L.Ed. 1355 (1953); Bendheim v. Commissioner, 214 F.2d 26, 28 (2d Cir.1954); Stanley A. Anderson, 11 T.C. 841 (1948); see also Standard Oil Co. v. McMahon, 244 F.2d 11, 13 (2d Cir.1957) ("[I]f prior payment has extinguished the 'deficiency,' there......