Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. BARNES'ESTATE

30 F.2d 289

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1929-01-11
Topic
general

BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge. The underlying question in these cases is whether a bona fide gift of an interest in a coal-mining company partnership in Pennsylvania was made by their respective husbands to the two women taxpayers. No notice was given to the third partner of the gift, transfer to the women was not registered, and they took no part in the management; they received the profits accruing to them as partners, made income reports accordingly, and paid the tax. The Commissioner contended thei gifts were not made in good faith and assessed the tax against the husbands. On appeal, the tax board found: “We are convinced that John Barnes, Jr., and Joseph Barnes, in December, 1939, in good faith, intended to give, and did give, to their several wives their several beneficial interests in the partnership of Atherton & Barnes, and that they and their wives thereafter acted upon that basis; heneo there was >2> fraud” — a finding supported by the evidence.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. BARNES'ESTATE. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
6 opinions
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REV. v. BARNES' EST.,30 F.2d 289(3rd Cir. 1929).
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. BARNES' ESTATE. SAME v. BARNES.
Nos. 3910, 3911.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
January 11, 1929.
Appeal from Board of Tax Appeals.

Proceedings by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, opposed by the Estate of John Barnes, Jr., and Joseph Barnes, administrator, and by Joseph Barnes in his individual capacity, to review decisions of the Board of Tax Appeals. Order of Board of Tax Appeals affirmed.
Mabel Walker Willebrandt, Asst. Atty. Gen., Sewall Key and Randolph C. Shaw, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen., and C.M. Charest and L.W. Scott, both of Washington, D.C., for petitioner.

George W. Zeigler, of Philipsburg, Pa., and John E. Cupp, of Philadelphia, Pa., for respondent.
Before BUFFINGTON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and THOMPSON, District Judge.
BUFFINGTON, Circuit Judge.
The underlying question in these cases is whether a bona fide gift of an interest in a coal-mining company partnership in Pennsylvania was made by their respective husbands to the two women taxpayers. No notice was given to the third partner of the gift, transfer to the women was not registered, and they took no part in the management; they received the profits accruing to them as partners, made income reports accordingly, and paid the tax.

The Commissioner contended the gifts were not made in good faith and assessed the tax against the husbands. On appeal, the tax board found: "We are convinced that John Barnes, Jr., and Joseph Barnes, in December, 1919, in good faith, intended to give, and did give, to their several wives their several beneficial interests in the partnership of Atherton Barnes, and that they and their wives thereafter acted upon that basis; hence there was no fraud" — a finding supported by the evidence.

We find the tax board committed no error on holding that the Pennsylvania statutes, viz. the Uniform Partnership Act of March 26, 1915 (Pa. St. 1920, § 16596 et seq.), and the Partnership Registration Act of April 14, 1851 (Pa. St. 1920, §§ 16639, 16640), did not invalidate the gift.

The order of the tax board is therefore affirmed.Page 290