BURNET, COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,
v.
PORTER ET AL., EXECUTORS
Mr. Justice Sutherland delivered the opinion of the Court.
William W. Porter was a subscriber in the sum of $75,000 to the fund described in our opinion handed down this day in Burnet v. Houston, ante, p. 223. The facts in the present case are the same except that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue first approved the deduction and allowed a claim for refund of the proportional part of the tax, and then some time later reopened the case, disallowed the deduction and redetermined the tax. The court, of appeals sustained the power of the commissioner upon the authority of McIlhenny v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 39 F. (2d) 356; and was clearly right in doing so. That court, however, upon the main point, following its decision in the Houston case, reversed the determination of the Board of Tax Appeals in favor of the government. 39 F. (2d) 360. This is contrary to our decision in the Houston case, and upon that authority the judgment is
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (63 total)
-
Sherwin v. United States, 320 F.2d 137 (9th Cir. 1963)…y [*155] ment and acceptance of the tax based on .■such determination and assessment, from reopening the case and making the further determination subsequently made by him.” That case was expressly approved ■and its rule adopted in Burnet v. Porter, 283 U.S. 230, 231, 51 S.Ct. 416, 75 L.Ed. 996.31 What this means is that notwithstanding the action taken upon the ■claim arising out of the loan, the Com■missioner had the right, as the cases just cited show, to change his ruling even on the claim as made, and…1 / 2
-
United States v. Great N. Ry. Co., 287 U.S. 144 (U.S. 1932)…. They did not act illegally like the officials whose acts were challenged in the cases cited by the petitioner. Wisconsin Central R. Co. v. United States, 164 U. S. 190; Grand Trunk Western Ry. Co. v. United States, 252 U. S. 112; Burnet v. Porter, 283 U. S. 230. Charged with a difficult task exacting judgment and discretion, they came to a decision in good faith with knowledge of the relevant facts and without departure from the law. If the payment under their certificate is to be reclaimed, some other gro…
-
Miss. Valley Tr. Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 72 F.2d 197 (8th Cir. 1934)…r there was a bequest, legaey, or devise within the statute. It has been repeatedly held that this estate tax' is upon the power of transmission from decedent which is made active by death (Klein v. United States, 283 U. S. 231, 234, 51 S. Ct. 398, 75 L. Ed. 996; Tyler v. United States, 281 U. S. 497, 502, 50 S. Ct. 356, 74 L. Ed. 991, 69 A. L. R. 758; Ithaca Trust [*199] Co. v. United States, 279 U. S. 151, 155, 49 S. Ct. 291, 73 L. Ed. 647; Chase Nat. Bank v. United States, 278 U. S. 327, 334, 49 S. Ct.…
Previewing 3 of 63 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- McILHENNY v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 39 F.2d 356 (3d Cir. 1930)
- Porter v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 39 F.2d 360 (3d Cir. 1930)