Section comports with equal protection requirements.

- There is a rational basis for providing different statutes of limitations based on the different situations provided for in former Code 1933, § 92-3303(a) and (f). Therefore, former subsection (f) did not deny equal protection under the state and federal Constitutions. Blackmon v. Monroe, 233 Ga. 656, 212 S.E.2d 827 (1975).

Period of limitations applies only to returns containing all required information.

- Information may be applied improperly in calculating tax liability, but after three years, if all required information is included in the return, the commissioner is barred from maintaining an action against the taxpayer. However, when the return does not give full information which is required, the statute will not run. Redwine v. Arvaniti, 83 Ga. App. 203, 63 S.E.2d 222 (1951).

Period of limitation inapplicable to examination of records.

- Provision that deficiency assessment must be made within three years from the date of filing an income tax return is only applicable to the assessment and collection of taxes and not to the right of examination of records. Redwine v. Arvaniti, 83 Ga. App. 203, 63 S.E.2d 222 (1951).

Taxpayer who missed three-year limitation period.

- O.C.G.A. § 48-7-82(e) did not give a taxpayer who missed the three-year limitation period for filing amended state returns a second opportunity to file an amendment; the taxpayer was not authorized by subsection (e) to submit an amended state tax return, and the taxpayer's untimely request for a refund was properly denied. Graham v. McKesson Info. Solutions, LLC, 279 Ga. App. 364, 631 S.E.2d 424 (2006).

Section does not bar the commissioner from collecting the amount admitted to be due when the return is filed, if that amount has not been paid. State v. Fuller, 90 Ga. App. 349, 83 S.E.2d 69 (1954).

Administrative interpretation of waivers by former commissioner will not estop present commissioner from relying on waivers, which toll the statute of limitation for 30 days beyond a time fixed by an unambiguous statute. Hawes v. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry., 223 Ga. 527, 156 S.E.2d 455 (1967).

No assessment proceeding is required when the return is accepted by the commissioner as correct.

- Tax is due and payable as a personal debt without an assessment. An assessment is an action taken only with regard to the collection of an amount of tax exceeding that returned by the taxpayer. State v. Fuller, 90 Ga. App. 349, 83 S.E.2d 69 (1954).

What constitutes a "report reflecting the changed or corrected net income."

- Conference report showing an increase in the taxpayer's tax liability, but which is not a final determination of the changed or corrected net income, is a "report reflecting the changed or corrected net income" for purposes of the statute of limitations. Chilivis v. Levy, 240 Ga. 792, 242 S.E.2d 594 (1978).

Conference report showing an increase in the taxpayer's tax is a report reflecting changed or corrected net income, notwithstanding the fact that the report does not show the changed or corrected net income itself. Chilivis v. Levy, 240 Ga. 792, 242 S.E.2d 594 (1978).

Failure to amend after increase of income by IRS.

- O.C.G.A. § 48-7-82(e)(1) required the debtor to provide an amended tax return because the IRS had reassessed the debtor's income upwards for the relevant tax years; because the debtor never filed an amended return for those years, the taxes were deemed nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(B)(i). Loc Ngoc Pham v. Ga. Dep't of Revenue (In re Loc Ngoc Pham), Bankr. (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Mar. 1, 2005).

Non-dischargeability in bankruptcy.

- Georgia Department of Revenue was not entitled to summary judgment on the department's nondischargeability claim under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(B)(i) based on the debtor's alleged failure to file an amended return as required by O.C.G.A. § 48-7-82(e)(1) because the department failed to establish that an amended return was actually due; the debtor's tax liability could have been adjusted by the IRS without an adjustment to the net income (for example, the debtor could have made a mistake in computing the tax based on net income that did not change), thus failing to trigger the filing requirement of paragraph (e)(1). Patterson v. Ga. Dep't. of Revenue (In re Patterson), Bankr. (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Dec. 12, 2006).

When the debtors failed to file an amended state income tax return after the debtors' federal income tax was revised upward by the IRS as required by O.C.G.A. § 48-7-82(e)(1), the debtors' state income tax based on the upward revision was excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(B)(i). Thovongsa v. Ga. Dep't of Revenue (In re Thavongsa), Bankr. (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Feb. 7, 2012).

Cited in Jones v. Georgia Dep't of Revenue, 158 Bankr. 535 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 1993).

Commissioner has three years to make assessment after return is filed.

- This section is a safeguard which gives the state an additional year in which to make the state's original audit and assessment. The General Assembly no doubt reasoned that if time permitted the commissioner to examine the return and make a proper assessment thereon within the two-year period, the commissioner should not be given additional time to reopen the assessment and correct the commissioner's own errors. If, however, the large volume of returns filed prevents the commissioner from completing work within the two-year period, the commissioner is granted an additional year in which to perform the duty. 1945-47 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 569.

When taxpayer makes full disclosure in an income tax return but the tax is erroneously computed, the period of limitation is three years. 1952-53 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 214.

Only material amendments to return change period of limitations.

- Obvious legislative intent of this section is to give the department sufficient time to review returns of taxpayers, and when a deficiency is discovered, time to make an assessment. A reasonable interpretation of this section would be that when the taxpayer files an amended return which makes no material change, but makes changes of a minor nature, that the period of limitations should commence on the date of the original return. On the other hand, when the taxpayer files an amended return which makes a material change, a logical and reasonable interpretation would have the period of limitations commence as to the material change only at the time of the filing of the amended return. 1948-49 Op. Att'y Gen. p. 677.

C.J.S.

- 85 C.J.S., Taxation, §§ 2003, 2042 et seq., 2075 et seq.

ALR.

- Duress in obtaining waiver from taxpayer extending time for assessment of income tax, 78 A.L.R. 631.

Liability on bond given as condition of extension of time for payment of income tax, 117 A.L.R. 452.

When statute of limitation commences to run against action to recover tax, 131 A.L.R. 822.

Settlement negotiations as estopping reliance on statute of limitations, 39 A.L.R.3d 127.

Suspension of running of period of limitation, under 26 U.S.C.A. § 6503, for federal tax assessment or collection, 160 A.L.R. Fed. 1