Starvest U.S., Inc. - Page 16

                                       - 16 -                                         

          authorized to handle the affairs of and protect the interests of            
          Starvest with respect to its tax matters for the years at issue,            
          regardless of the title under which he acted.  Causing the                  
          petitions to be filed in Starvest's name was among the duties               
          that he performed on the corporation's behalf.  Based upon the              
          foregoing facts and the principles of agency, therefore, the                
          Court holds that Jacques de Bruijn was authorized to cause the              
          petitions in these cases to be filed on behalf of Starvest.                 
               Even if the Court were to conclude that Starvest did not               
          authorize Mr. de Bruijn to cause the petitions to be filed on its           
          behalf, there is ample evidence that Starvest ratified the filing           
          of the petitions.  In this regard, this Court has held that a               
          taxpayer can ratify a previously filed petition, even in the                
          absence of express approval, through action or inaction                     
          implicitly approving the filing of the petition.  See Mishawaka             
          Properties Co. v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 353 (1993); Kraasch v.             
          Commissioner, supra.                                                        
               In Kraasch v. Commissioner, supra at 627, 628, this Court              
          found that the accountant, in filing the petition, "acted as the            
          authorized agent of * * * [the taxpayers]" and that "even if this           
          were a situation where * * * [the accountant] acted upon * * *              
          [the taxpayers'] behalf without authority, * * * [the taxpayers]            
          are still bound * * * because they subsequently ratified * * *              
          [the accountant's] actions."  The ratification was implied                  

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011