Robida v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, 20592.

Decision Date03 March 1967
Docket NumberNo. 20592.,20592.
PartiesDaniel A. ROBIDA, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

John R. Swendsen, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant.

Mitchell Rogovin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tax Div., Lee A. Jackson, David O. Walter, Carolyn R. Just, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Lester Uretz, Chief Counsel, I. R. S., Washington, D. C., for appellee.

Before HAMLIN, BROWNING, and ELY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Here we have a petition to review an unreported decision of the Tax Court. The respondent resists the contentions made in the petition, but, at the same time, he moves that we, "in the interest of complete fairness," remand the case to the Tax Court for further, but limited, proceedings.

Involved are claimed income tax deficiencies for the years 1956 through 1961. There is no dispute over the fact that petitioner derived the income upon which the deficiencies were assessed through his ability to "manipulate" slot machines located in military service clubs, principally in Germany. The petitioner, undertaking to represent himself, was unsuccessful in his presentation of a Petition for Refund in the Tax Court. The primary issue was petitioner's claim that the revenue, reported by petitioner in his tax returns for the years in question, was exempt under section 911 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

In 1963 petitioner was taken into custody by German police and expelled from Germany. At the time of the arrest the German authorities seized certain of petitioner's personal records, including diaries, without the restoration of which, claims petitioner, he is unable to recall and explain facts which would operate to his favor in the resolution of his controversy with the Revenue Service. The respondent admits that the Revenue Service, through other agencies of the United States, obtained a portion of petitioner's records from the German police. These records were not made available to petitioner prior to the hearing in the Tax Court. It is because of this that the respondent has moved for remand.

It is conceded that petitioner should have been given the opportunity to examine and make use of such of his records as the Revenue Service actually has. The petitioner is not satisfied with this. He urges that the Revenue Service did not obtain all of the records which are of significant materiality to his contentions and that, since the Revenue...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Riland v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • August 2, 1982
    ...over all the papers in its files relating to a prosecution witness after the trial court had ordered their production. Robida v. Commissioner, 371 F.2d 518 (9th Cir. 1967), vacating and remanding a Memorandum Opinion of this Court, involved a situation where the IRS had obtained various rec......
  • Greenberg's Express, Inc. v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • June 18, 1974
    ...distinguishes practically all of the cases relied upon by petitioners. Compare Bob Jones University v. Simon, supra; Robida v. Commissioner, 371 F.2d 518 (C.A. 9, 1967); Boyd v. United States, 345 F.Supp. 790 (E.D.N.Y. 1972). In this connection, we note that petitioners make no claim that t......
  • Robida v. CIR, 26910.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • May 23, 1972
    ...to Robida, but we remanded to permit further discovery of documents then being held by German government authorities. Robida v. Commissioner, 9 Cir., 1967, 371 F.2d 518. In the proceedings on remand the tax court reversed its previous position and held that the income in question was "earne......
  • ROBIDA v. Commissioner, Docket No. 4861-62.
    • United States
    • U.S. Tax Court
    • April 15, 1970
    ...TIETJENS, Judge: This case is here on remand from the Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Robida v. Commissioner 67-1 USTC ¶ 9198, 371 F. 2d 518 (C. A. 9, 1967). Vacating the decision of this Court, the Court of Appeals directed that further proceedings be entertained by this Here we have a pe......

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