- 14 - Gabelman v. Commissioner from that in Ameel v. United States, 426 F.2d 1270 (6th Cir. 1970), where the Sixth Circuit itself had previously applied a facts and circumstances test in deciding whether a taxpayer's remittance made during an audit qualified as a deposit or payment. Gabelman v. Commissioner, supra at 612- 613. Following the Golsen rule and applying the holding of the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit set forth in Gabelman v. Commissioner, supra, that remittances submitted with Form 4868 extension requests are payments of tax as a matter of law, we hold that the remittance in this case was a payment of tax, not a deposit. In accordance with the parties' stipulation of agreed issues and the above holding, An appropriate decision will be entered.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Last modified: May 25, 2011