Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 31 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Tokarski v. Commissioner.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tokarski v. Commissioner Anchor | green | “a bank deposit is prima facie evidence of income and respondent need not prove a likely source of that income.” | 18 |
| 2 | Estate of Mason v. Commissioner | green | “the use of the bank deposit method for computing income has long been sanctioned by the courts.” | 9 |
| 3 | Tokarski v. Commissioner | green | “a bank deposit is prima facie evidence of income and the commissioner need not prove a likely source of that income.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.