Herbert C. Elliott - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
          constitute a signed return under section 1.6012-1(a)(5), Income             
          Tax Regs.                                                                   
               Petitioner does not directly attack the validity of section            
          1.6012-1(a)(5), Income Tax Regs.  Rather, petitioner relies upon            
          Miller v. Commissioner, 237 F.2d 830 (5th Cir. 1956), affg. in              
          part, revg. in pertinent part and remanding T.C. Memo. 1955-112,            
          to support his position.  In Miller the taxpayer submitted                  
          returns that he did not sign.  For the 1943 year the taxpayer had           
          his wife sign the return for him.  See id. at 832.  This was done           
          at the taxpayer's direction and in front of his accountant.  "All           
          of the inscriptions were affixed by the taxpayer's wife, upon his           
          oral authorization and direction, at the place on the return                
          pointed out by the accountant who had prepared the return."  Id.            
               The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that                   
                    Where, as here, a return complete in form, signed in              
               the taxpayer's name by one purporting to have authority and            
               who actually had such authority, was filed, we find no basis           
               for holding that this was no such return as would commence             
               the running of the statute of limitations. * * * [Id. at               
          In Booher v. Commissioner, 28 T.C. 817, 824-825 (1957), this                
          Court adopted the reasoning of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth           
          Circuit in Miller v. Commissioner, supra, and in Lombardo v.                
          Commissioner, 99 T.C. 342, 358 (1992), affd. sub nom. Davis v.              
          Commissioner, 68 F.3d 1129 (9th Cir. 1995), we reiterated that              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011