Summary

Portrait of Benjamin N. Cardozo Benjamin N. Cardozo Zellerbach Paper Co. v. Helvering National Paper Products Co…

Certainly the average man would be slow to suspect that he was subject to such a duty. If he looked into the Treasury Decisions, he would learn that the Commissioner agreed with him. In these he was told by the plainest inplication that unless he had an additional tax to pay, his return would stand as filed, without supplement or correction. Now, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is without dispensing power. If a return under the old act is not good under the new one, but, instead, is an utter nullity, he may not relieve the taxpayer of making a return over again.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Benjamin N. Cardozo Benjamin N. Cardozo Zellerbach Paper Co. v. Helvering National Paper Products Co…

The statute supplies no basis for such a principle of division. An examiner needs more time for an audit when errors are latent, to be discovered only by digging into books and vouchers, than when errors are apparent upon a bare inspection of the record. It would be a strange rule of limitation that would vary his opportunity inversely to his needs.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Benjamin N. Cardozo Benjamin N. Cardozo Zellerbach Paper Co. v. Helvering National Paper Products Co…

The Revenue Act of 1921 provides (section 250 (d) that income and profits taxes shall be determined and assessed by the Commissioner within four years after a return is filed. If the return filed by the petitioners or in their behalf in July, 1921, served to set in motion the term of limitation, the assessments were too late. The Board of Tax Appeals, however, upheld the action of the Commissioner, and ruled (two members dissenting) that the return on file was a nullity, and hence that the statute of limitations had never been set running.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature