Flomarcy Company, Inc., Petitioner, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent.jose Bensaude and Maria Bensaude, Petitioners, v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent, 324 F.2d 730 (2d Cir. 1963)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit - 324 F.2d 730 (2d Cir. 1963) Submitted November 6, 1963
Decided November 22, 1963

Samuel Zuckerman, New York City, for petitioners.

Louis F. Oberdorfer, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lee A. Jackson, Melva M. Graney and Alec A. Pandaleon, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for respondent.

Before WATERMAN, MOORE and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.


Flomarcy Company, Inc. and its controlling shareholders appeal from a decision of the Tax Court, T.C.Memo. 1962-201, upholding the assessment of deficiencies against the petitioners for failure to report income which the company had earned but which petitioners had caused to be paid to third parties. The taxpayers introduced no evidence, and it is well settled that deficiency assessments of the Commissioner are presumptively correct. Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115, 54 S. Ct. 8, 78 L. Ed. 212 (1933); Brown v. Commissioner, 141 F.2d 307, 309 (2 Cir. 1944). The argument made on this appeal that the government should have the burden of proof because a constructive dividend is a legal fiction is without legal or logical basis. The decision of the Tax Court is affirmed.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.