L. LAMAR BEACHAM AND EDITH R. BEACHAM, PETITIONER,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT

5th Cir. | 1958-04-30
No. 17003
255 F.2d 103 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1958) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The Tax Court did not err in holding that sections 294(d)(1) and 294(d)(2) of the 1939 Code are constitutional.


Facts & Procedural History

Taxpayers appealed an adverse decision from the Tax Court regarding additions to taxes for failure to file and substantial underestimation of estimate…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by taxpayers from an adverse decision of the Tax Court, reported at 28 T.C. 598. It involves additions to taxes for failures to file declarations of estimated tax for the years 1951 and 1952, and for substantial underestimates of estimated tax for the same years.

It presents the single question whether the Tax Court erred in holding that Sec. 294(d) (1) and 294(d) (2) of the 1939 Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 294(d) (1, 2), which impose additions to income tax, for failure to make and file a declaration of estimated tax, and for substantial understatements of income, are within the power of Congress to enact and are not repugnant to the due process clauses of the Fifth Amendment.

We have in similar, if not identical, cases, Abney v. Campbell, 5 Cir., 206 F. 2d 836 and Walker v. United States, 5 Cir., 240 F. 2d 601, rejected in principle the contentions and arguments appellants make here. Moreover, we find ourselves in complete agreement with the opinion of the Tax Court. Without further discussion, therefore, we will content ourselves with saying so and that, for the reasons stated and upon the authorities cited above and by the Tax Court, to which may be added Erwin v. Cranquist, 9 Cir., 253 F. 2d 26 and Porth v. Brod-rick, 10 Cir., 214 F. 2d 925, the order of the Tax Court must be affirmed.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw