Spencer D. Stewart, Et Ux. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that in making a substance over form argument, the Commissioner “may rely on a body of law” including the economic substance and business purpose tests
• stating that it is preferable for the Commissioner to inform a taxpayer of legal theories in the notice of deficiency and the Tax Court answer, but the failure to do so does not necessarily result in forfeiture
• where corporation acted as “merely a conduit” for the sale of appreciated securities by the taxpayer, several steps collapsed into one under the substance-over-form principle
• “It is well settled that the assertion of a new theory that merely clarifies the original determination, without requiring the presentation of different evidence, does not shift the burden of proof.”
• taxpayer retains the burden of proof on new theories as opposed to new matters
• “It is well settled that the assertion of a new theory that merely 52 clarifies the original determination, without requiring the presentation of different evidence, does not shift the burden of proof.” (citing Achiro v. Commissioner, 77 T.C. 881, 890 (1981))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).