- 12 -12
Commissioner, 53 T.C. 135, 158 (1969) (citing Poro v.
Commissioner, 39 T.C. 641, 644 (1963)). In a similar situation,
the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has stated: "The
allegation quoted was certainly not so incredible as to justify
the Tax Court in ignoring the Commissioner's flat admission of
it. It was supported by the testimony of the taxpayer's
accountant in the prior proceeding." Gensinger v. Commissioner,
208 F.2d 576, 580 (9th Cir. 1953), remanding 18 T.C. 122 (1952).
In Gensinger, the Commissioner had admitted in the answer that
"'all corporate obligations were paid on or before July 15,
1943.'" Id. at 579. The Court of Appeals stated: "The taxpayer
had a right to rely upon the Commissioner's admission, and the
record indicates that he did so. We think it was settled on the
pleadings that all corporate obligations were paid on or before
July 15, 1943, and that the Tax Court was bound to so find." Id.
at 580. Petitioners, in the case at bar, likewise relied on the
pleadings. Although there is evidence that Mrs. Marcus had a
dual purpose when she entered into the arrangement, the admitted
allegation that she did so "as a substitute for a bequest of
property" and "in settlement of all claims" against the estate is
not "incredible"; there is evidence to support the admitted
allegation. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has given
substantial deference to an admission in the pleadings.
Handeland v. Commissioner, 519 F.2d 327, 329 (9th Cir. 1975).
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011