- 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
837.]
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
position.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011