From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scadron's Estate v. Commr. of Internal Revenue

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Apr 27, 1954
212 F.2d 188 (2d Cir. 1954)

Opinion

No. 219, Docket No. 22949.

Argued April 6, 1954.

Decided April 27, 1954.

Raphael P. Koenig, Saul L. Harris, Harris Witlin, New York City, for petitioner.

H. Brian Holland, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ellis N. Slack, S. Dee Hanson, Special Assts. to the Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Before CHASE, Chief Judge, and SWAN and FRANK, Circuit Judges.


The filing of a fraudulent return by the deceased taxpayer for each of the taxable periods was amply proved and the decision of the Tax Court is affirmed on the authority of Kirk v. Commissioner, 1 Cir., 179 F.2d 619, and Reimer's Estate v. Commissioner, 6 Cir., 180 F.2d 159.

In both of these decisions what was said in Helvering v. Mitchell, 303 U.S. 391, 58 S.Ct. 630, 82 L.Ed. 917, to the effect that such additions are but civil administrative sanctions of a remedial character in aid of the assessment and collection of taxes was taken to mean not only that they were not penalties imposed as punishment for crime, which was what was actually decided in the Mitchell case, but that, as the language in that opinion indicates, they are not to be considered penal in any sense. We agree though, if we thought the question res integra, we might reach a different conclusion.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Scadron's Estate v. Commr. of Internal Revenue

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Apr 27, 1954
212 F.2d 188 (2d Cir. 1954)
Case details for

Scadron's Estate v. Commr. of Internal Revenue

Case Details

Full title:SCADRON'S ESTATE v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Apr 27, 1954

Citations

212 F.2d 188 (2d Cir. 1954)

Citing Cases

United States v. Estate of Schoenfeld

This applies equally to monetary tax penalties. See Helvering, 303 U.S. at 401, 58 S.Ct. 630 ("The remedial…

United States v. Schneider

The Court of Appeals has held that "what was said in Helvering v. Mitchell, * * * to the effect that such…