From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Doll v. C.I.R

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Apr 12, 1966
358 F.2d 713 (3d Cir. 1966)

Summary

In Doll v. Commissioner, 358 F.2d 713 (3d Cir. 1966) (per curiam), this court held that the absence of the taxpayer's signature on the taxpayer's return was enough to render the return invalid and, as a result, to preclude the operation of the Section(s) 6501(a) limitations period on assessment.

Summary of this case from Bachner v. C.I.R

Opinion

No. 15669.

Submitted March 10, 1966.

Decided April 12, 1966.

Arthur Markowitz, Robert H. Griffith, York, Pa., (Robert H. Griffith, York, Pa., on the brief), for petitioners.

Richard M. Roberts, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, Chief, Appellate Section, David O. Walter, Howard M. Koff, Tax Division, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., and Mitchell Rogin, Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Before SMITH and FREEDMAN, Circuit Judges, and MILLER, District Judge.


This case is before the Court on a petition to review a decision of the Tax Court. The question before us is whether the Tax Court erred in its determination that an assessment of a tax deficiency for the taxable year 1954 was not barred by the statute of limitations. 26 U.S.C.A. 6501(a). We are of the opinion that the case is governed by Lucas v. Pilliod Lumber Co., 281 U.S. 245, 50 S.Ct. 297, 74 L.Ed. 829 (1930). It was therein held that the statute of limitations did not bar the assessment of a tax deficiency where, as in the instant case, the return failed to meet the requirements of the statute. The return filed by the petitioners in the case before us was not signed by either of them.

The judgment of the Tax Court will be affirmed on its opinion.


Summaries of

Doll v. C.I.R

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Apr 12, 1966
358 F.2d 713 (3d Cir. 1966)

In Doll v. Commissioner, 358 F.2d 713 (3d Cir. 1966) (per curiam), this court held that the absence of the taxpayer's signature on the taxpayer's return was enough to render the return invalid and, as a result, to preclude the operation of the Section(s) 6501(a) limitations period on assessment.

Summary of this case from Bachner v. C.I.R
Case details for

Doll v. C.I.R

Case Details

Full title:Jacob A. DOLL and Esther Doll, Petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Apr 12, 1966

Citations

358 F.2d 713 (3d Cir. 1966)

Citing Cases

Olpin v. C.I.R

The general rule when a tax return is unsigned is that it is invalid. Lucas v. Pilliod Lumber Co., 281 U.S.…

Walden v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

To constitute a valid return, the return must be signed. Section 6061; Doll v. Commissioner, 358 F.2d 713 (3d…