United States v. Edward M. Zolla

Good Law
724 F.2d 808·53 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 652·1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 26138
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 24, 198482-5947California1,554 words

Opinion

Opinion

Goodwin, J.

Zoila appeals a district court judgment in favor of the government in its action to reduce to judgment Zolla’s federal income tax liabilities for 1968 and 1969.

Neither the government nor Zoila introduced direct evidence of Zolla’s income and deductions for the years in question. The government relied upon the presumption of correctness that attaches to the IRS’s determination of a tax deficiency. See Rockwell v. Commissioner, 512 F.2d 882, 885 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1015 , 96 S.Ct. 448 , 46 L.Ed.2d 386 (1975). Zoila argued that the presumption of correctness should not apply because: (1) the determination of deficiency was arbitrary; (2) there was insufficient evidence that the Government mailed the statutory notice of deficiency; and (3) that the notice, if sent, was not mailed to his last known address. The district court, finding no genuine issues of material fact, held that the government was entitled to prevail as a matter of law, and entered summary judgment for the government. We affirm.

A. The Deficiency Was Not Arbitrary

This court has held that no presumption of correctness attaches to deficiency determinations in which the IRS charges a taxpayer with…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.