Deakman-Wells Co. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

Decision Date15 June 1953
Docket NumberDocket No. 36865.
Citation20 T.C. 610
PartiesDEAKMAN-WELLS COMPANY, INC., PETITIONER v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT.
CourtU.S. Tax Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Increased deficiency claimed in amended answer more than 5 years after return filed held not barred by 5-year statute of limitations effective when more than 25 per cent of gross income is omitted from return, timely deficiency notice having been mailed within 5 years and petition for redetermination thereof duly filed. Edward E. Burke, C.P.A., for the petitioner.

Francis X. Gallagher, Esq., for the respondent.

Respondent determined deficiencies in income taxes against petitioner as follows:

+---------------------------+
                ¦Year ended    ¦Deficiency  ¦
                +--------------+------------¦
                ¦              ¦            ¦
                +--------------+------------¦
                ¦Apr. 30, 1947 ¦$506.51     ¦
                +--------------+------------¦
                ¦Apr. 30, 1948 ¦24,959.08   ¦
                +--------------+------------¦
                ¦Apr. 30, 1949 ¦27,304.91   ¦
                +--------------+------------¦
                ¦Apr. 30, 1950 ¦41,232.06   ¦
                +---------------------------+
                

In an amended answer respondent claimed an additional deficiency in the amount of $31,010.24 for the taxable year ended April 30, 1947. The sole question presented is whether the assessment of the increased deficiency for the taxable year ended April 30, 1947, is barred by the statute of limitations.

FINDINGS OF FACT

All of the facts were stipulated and are hereby found.

Petitioner, a corporation organized under the laws of the State of New Jersey, with its principal office in Jersey City, filed its corporation income tax returns for the taxable years involved with the collector of internal revenue for the fifth district of New Jersey. During each of the taxable years involved, petitioner was engaged in the business of constructing buildings.

Since its incorporation, petitioner has kept its books of account on an accrual basis and filed its Federal income tax returns on a cash basis. The accrual method of accounting clearly reflected the net income of petitioner for each of the taxable years involved and petitioner's net income should have been computed and reported in its returns in accordance therewith.

Petitioner's return for the taxable year ended April 39, 1047, was filed on July 15, 1947. The notice of deficiency was sent to petitioner on June 27, 1951. The only portion of such notice relating to the taxable year ended April 30, 1947, concerned the disallowance of a carryback loss from the taxable year ended April 30, 1948.

Petitioner's return for the taxable year ended April 30, 1947, did not contain any report on page 1 of items includible in gross income, but in a schedule entitled ‘Statement of Operations‘ attached to the inside portion of such return, petitioner reported and computed gross profit as follows:

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦Income:                                             ¦¦             ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦                                                    ¦¦             ¦
                +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
                ¦From construction contracts, rental of equipment, etc¦$1,471,581.08¦
                +-----------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
                ¦Plus: Unpaid accounts receivable Apr. 30, 1946      ¦¦10,674.04    ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦                                                    ¦¦1,482,255.12 ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦Deduct unpaid accounts receivable Apr. 30, 1947     ¦¦217,931.43   ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦Sales—Cash basis                                    ¦¦1,264,323.69 ¦
                +----------------------------------------------------++-------------¦
                ¦                                                    ¦¦             ¦
                +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
                
Cost of Sales:  
                Job costs                                  $1,323,032.16
                Small tools consumed                       (848.08)
                Job expenses                               4,336.86
                Yard rent                                  270.00
                                                           1,326,790.94
                Less—Discounts                             1,947.60
                                                           1,324.843.34
                Plus—Accounts payable—Unpaid Apr. 30, 1946 23,747.57
                                                           1,348,590.91
                Less—Accounts payable—Unpaid Apr. 30, 1947 158,310.09
                                                                         $1,190,280.82
                Gross profit                                             $74,042.87
                

If the gross profit had been computed by petitioner upon the accrual basis, such computation would have been as follows:

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
                ¦From construction contracts, rental of equipment, etc¦$1,471,581.08¦
                +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
                
Cost of Sales:  
                Job costs            $1,323,032.16
                Small tools consumed (848.08)
                Job Expenses         4,336.86
                Yard rent            270.00
                                     $1,326,790.94
                Less: Discounts      1,947.60
                                                   1,324,843.34
                Gross profit                       $146,737.74
                

Petitioner omitted from gross income reported for the taxable year ended April 30, 1947, amounts properly includible therein which are in excess of 25 per cent of the gross income reported.

OPINION.

OPPER, Judge:

Petitioner did not file its returns and compute its tax in accordance with the accounting method employed in keeping its books. These are circumstances authorizing respondent to require that correct returns be filed. C. L. Carver, 10 T.C. 171, affd. (C.A. 6) 173 F.2d 29. As petitioner itself describes its action: ‘It kept its books on an accrual basis and it stated its income figures, including the amount of its gross income, in its tax return on an accrual basis. However, the taxpayer then proceeded, doing so by plain statement thereof on the face of the return, to convert the figures to a cash basis for the purpose...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Lawrence v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • 25 Enero 1957
    ...help the present taxpayer. Uptegrove Lumber Co. v. Commissioner, 204 F.2d 570; Deakman-Wells Co. v. Commissioner, 213 F.2d 894, reversing 20 T.C. 610; Goodenow v. Commissioner, 238 F.2d 20, reversing 25 T.C. 1; Reis v. Commissioner, 142 F.2d 900, affirming 1 T.C. 9 and a Memorandum Opinion ......
  • Patchen v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • 23 Julio 1958
    ...listed these cases in support of the holding: Charles D. Mifflin, 1955, 24 T.C. 973; Melvin E. Tunningley, 1954, 22 T.C. 1108; Deakman-Wells Co., 1953, 20 T.C. 610, reversed on other grounds 3 Cir., 1954, 213 F.2d 894; Bradstreet Co. of Maine, 1931, 23 B.T.A. 1093, reversed on other grounds......
  • Scar v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • 17 Noviembre 1983
    ...6213(a); Frieling v. Commissioner, supra. Compare Deakman-Wells Co. v. Commissioner, 213 F.2d 894, 897–899 (3d Cir. 1954), revg. 20 T.C. 610 (1953). Under these circumstances, even if respondent had asked for an increased deficiency (respondent has actually reduced his asserted deficiency h......
  • Maxcy v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue , Docket No. 870-71.
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • 1 Marzo 1973
    ...the determination of such deficiencies. Deakman-Wells Co. v. Commissioner, 213 F.2d 894, 899 (C.A. 3, 1954), reversing on another issue 20 T.C. 610 (1953); United Surgical Steel Co., 54 T.C. 1215, 1226-1227 (1970). In 1966, Public Law 89-721, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (80 Stat. 1150 (Part 1), ad......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT