- 54 -
1002(a) of the act provided review for "an individual" by the
circuit "whereof he is an inhabitant". Section 1002(b) of the
act provided review for "a person (other than an individual)" by
the circuit in which is located the office of the collector where
the tax return was filed. The term "person (other than an
individual)" was defined to include an estate. See Ayer v.
Commissioner, 63 F.2d 231 (2d Cir. 1933), dismissing appeal from
26 B.T.A. 9 (1932). Because of the definition of "person (other
than an individual)" to include an estate and confusion as to
where returns were to be filed,8 the cases construing section
1002 of the Revenue Act of 1926 are not on point or particularly
helpful in the present inquiry. See Estate of Turner v.
Helvering, 68 F.2d 759 (D.C. Cir. 1934); Ayer v. Commissioner,
supra; Matheson v. Commissioner, 54 F.2d 537 (2d Cir. 1931),
affg. 18 B.T.A. 674 (1930); Rusk v. Commissioner, 53 F.2d 428
(7th Cir. 1931), affg. 20 B.T.A. 138 (1930).
In 1934 the venue provision for the Board of Tax Appeals was
changed to make venue depend entirely upon where the tax return
was filed. Section 519 of the Revenue Act of 1934, ch. 277, 48
Stat. 680, 760, amended section 1002 of the Revenue Act of 1926
to read as follows:
8 The estate income tax return was filed with the office of the
collector for the district where the fiduciary resided; the
estate tax return was filed in the office of the collector for
the district where the decedent resided at the time of his death.
Revenue Act of 1924, ch. 234, secs. 225(b), 300, 304, 43 Stat.
253, 280, 303, 307.
Page: Previous 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011