Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    Leon Rosenfield, As Administrator, D.B.N.C.T.A. of Estate of George D. Beaston, Deceased v. United States, 254 F.2d 940, 3rd Cir. (1958)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The administrator of an estate sought a tax refund after additional estate taxes were assessed due to the original executor's election on the estate tax return to value assets one year after death. The district court denied the refund, relying on Treasury regulations providing that the valuation election cannot be changed after the tax return filing deadline. On appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed, finding the original election was binding because it was made with full disclosure of the relevant facts, even if based on a mistaken understanding of the election's consequences.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Leon Rosenfield, As Administrator, D.B.N.C.T.A. of Estate of George D. Beaston, Deceased v. United States, 254 F.2d 940, 3rd Cir. (1958)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    The administrator of an estate sought a tax refund after additional estate taxes were assessed due to the original executor's election on the estate tax return to value assets one year after death. The district court denied the refund, relying on Treasury regulations providing that the valuation election cannot be changed after the tax return filing deadline. On appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed, finding the original election was binding because it was made with full disclosure of the relevant facts, even if based on a mistaken understanding of the election's consequences.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1958-05-12 Precedential Status: Precedential Citations: 254 F.2d 940 Docket: 12463

    Original Title

    Leon Rosenfield, as Administrator, D.B.N.C.T.A. Of Estate of George D. Beaston, Deceased v. United States, 254 F.2d 940, 3rd Cir. (1958)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The administrator of an estate sought a tax refund after additional estate taxes were assessed due to the original executor's election on the estate tax return to value assets one year after death. The district court denied the refund, relying on Treasury regulations providing that the valuation election cannot be changed after the tax return filing deadline. On appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed, finding the original election was binding because it was made with full disclosure of the relevant facts, even if based on a mistaken understanding of the election's consequences.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    5 views2 pages

    Leon Rosenfield, As Administrator, D.B.N.C.T.A. of Estate of George D. Beaston, Deceased v. United States, 254 F.2d 940, 3rd Cir. (1958)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The administrator of an estate sought a tax refund after additional estate taxes were assessed due to the original executor's election on the estate tax return to value assets one year after death. The district court denied the refund, relying on Treasury regulations providing that the valuation election cannot be changed after the tax return filing deadline. On appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed, finding the original election was binding because it was made with full disclosure of the relevant facts, even if based on a mistaken understanding of the election's consequences.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    254 F.

    2d 940
    58-1 USTC P 11,764

    Leon ROSENFIELD, as Administrator, D.B.N.C.T.A. of Estate


    of
    George D. Beaston, Deceased, Appellant,
    v.
    UNITED STATES of America.
    No. 12463.

    United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.


    Argued April 17, 1958.
    Decided May 12, 1958.

    Herbert M. Linsenberg, Philadelphia, Pa. (Leon Meltzer, Philadelphia,


    Pa., on the brief), for appellant.
    S. Dee Hanson, Washington, D.C. (Charles K. Rice, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee
    A. Jackson, A. F. Prescott, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C.,
    Harold K. Wood, U.S. Atty., Norman C. Henss, Asst. U.S. Atty.,
    Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.
    Before GOODRICH, McLAUGHLIN and STALEY, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM.

    The Internal Revenue Code of 1939 permits the representative of an estate the
    election of evaluating the assets in the gross estate either as of the date of death
    or one year after death. 26 U.S.C. 811 (1952 ed.). Section 81.11 of Treasury
    Regulation 105 provides that 'In no case may the election be exercised, or a
    previous election changed, after the expiration of the time for the filing of the
    return.'

    The administrator d.b.n.c.t.a. in this case seeks a refund of additional estate tax
    assessed by the Commissioner. The additional tax was the result of the original
    executor's apparent election manifested on the estate's return to have the assets
    valued one year from date of death. It is the administrator's argument here that

    the apparent election was not binding and irrevocable because it was made
    upon a mistake as to the consequences of that election.
    3

    The district court entered judgment for defendant, relying on Section 81.11 of
    Treasury Regulation 105 and analogous tax cases denying the right to change
    the election after date for filing has passed. D.C.E.D.Pa.1957, 156 F.Supp. 780.
    The election here was made upon a full disclosure of facts. It is therefore
    binding, and we can add nothing to the opinion of the district court.

    The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

    You might also like