Fada Gobins v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1955). · Go Syfert
Search
Fada Gobins v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1955). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
87 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Ginsberg v. Commissioner (tax, 1961-03-31)
Treatment trajectory · 1955 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1955 1990 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Ginsberg v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1961 · confidence medium
Fada Gobins , 18 T.C. 1159 , affirmed per curiam 217 F. 2d 952 *205 (C.A. 9).
discussed Cited "see" Lawrence James Saccato
Tax Ct. · 2023 · signal: see · confidence high
“When a taxpayer keeps no books or records, has large bank deposits, and offers no plausible explanation of such deposits, the Commissioner is not arbitrary or capricious in resorting to the bank deposit method for computing income.” Estate of Mason v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 651, 657 (1975), aff’d, 566 F.2d 2 (6th Cir. 1977); see Gobins v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 1159, 1168 (1952), aff’d per curiam, 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1954).
discussed Cited "see" Johnson v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gobins v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 1159 , 1168-1169 (1952) , affd. per curiam 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1954) . *287 Amounts received by a taxpayer while acting as an agent or conduit are not required to be reported as income.
discussed Cited "see" Seagate Technology v. Commissioner (2×)
unknown court · 1994 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gobins v. Commissioner , 18 T.C. 1159 , 1168-1169 (1952) , *43 affd. per curiam 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1954) ; Kim v. Commissioner , T.C.
cited Cited "see" Kim v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gobins v. Commissioner , 18 T.C. 1159 , 1168-1169 (1952) , affd. 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1954) .
cited Cited "see" Ripley v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gobins v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 1159 , 1168-1169 (1952) , affd. 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1954) .
cited Cited "see" United States v. Stonehill
9th Cir. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gobins v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 1159, 1169 (1952), aff'd per curiam, 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir.1954); Silverman v. Commissioner, 538 F.2d 927, 930-31 (2d Cir.1976).
cited Cited "see" United States v. Stonehill
9th Cir. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gobins v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 1159, 1169 (1952), aff’d per curiam, 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir.1954); Silverman v. Commissioner, 538 F.2d 927, 930-31 (2d Cir.1976).
discussed Cited "see" Southern Pacific Transp. Co. v. Commissioner (2×)
unknown court · 1980 · signal: see · confidence high
See Gobins v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 1159, 1168-1169 (1952), affd. per curiam 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1954).
cited Cited "see" Lawless v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1966 · signal: see · confidence high
See Fada Gobins, 18 T.C. 1159 , affd. 217 F. 2d 952 ; Estate of Henry Miller, 42 T.C. 593 ; Leon G.
cited Cited "see" Davis v. Commissioner
Tax Ct. · 1964 · signal: see · confidence high
See Fada Gobins, 18 T.C. 1159 , 1170 (1952) , affd. per curiam 217 F. 2d 952 (C.A. 9, 1954).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Fada Gobins
v.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue
13845.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Feb 11, 1955.
217 F.2d 952
Published

217 F.2d 952

55-1 USTC P 9160

Fada GOBINS, Petitioner,
v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

No. 13845.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Dec. 27, 1954.
Rehearing Denied Feb. 11, 1955.

Petition to Review a Decision of the Tax Court of the United States.

Norman Elkington, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner.

H. Brian Holland, Asst. Atty. Gen., Elmer J. Kelsey, Ellis N. Slack, Howard P. Locke, John J. Kelley, Jr., Sp. Assts. to Atty. Gen., Charles W. Davis, Chief Counsel, Int. Rev. Service, Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Before MATHEWS and ORR, Circuit Judges, and DRIVER, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

1

On the grounds and for the reasons stated in its opinion, 18 T.C. 1159, the decision of the Tax Court is affirmed.