26 U.S.C. § 5603
Penalty relating to records, returns, and reports
A prior section 5603, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 684, related to penalty for failure or refusal of distiller or rectifier to give notice of intention to engage in such business, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859. See section 5601(a)(2), (3) of this title.
Provisions similar to those comprising this section were contained in prior sections 5610, 5611, 5620, 5621, 5692, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 685 to 687, 703, prior to the general revision of this chapter by Pub. L. 85–859.
2018—Pub. L. 115–141 inserted comma after “returns” in section catchline.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1964–2019 · leading case: Michaels Enter., Inc. v. United States, 376 U.S. 356 (1964).
Michaels Enter., Inc. v. United States, 376 U.S. 356 (1964). “1400 , 26 U. S. C. § 5603 (b)(5). The second count charged them with failure “to keep” certain purchase records or “make required entries therein” in violation of 72 Stat.”
United States v. Ciaccio, 356 F. Supp. 1373 (D. Maryland 1972). “§ 5124 (a), 26 U.S.C. § 5603 (a) and (b). 4. Making a false statement on a document where the matter is within the jurisdiction of the United States.”
United States v. Maurice Friedman, 416 F.2d 947 (7th Cir. 1969). “Defendant, a retail liquor dealer, was indicted for violations of 26 U.S.C. § 5603 (b): Count I charged defendant with violation of 26 U.”
United States v. Kubik, 266 F. Supp. 501 (S.D. Iowa 1967). “§ 5124 and in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5603 ; in Count II the defendant, being a person who sold and offered for sale distilled spirits, is charged with possessing a liquor bottle in which there had been placed distilled spirits other than those contained in said bottle at the…”
United States v. Fine, 413 F. Supp. 728 (W.D. Wis. 1976). “§ 7011 (a), in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5603 (a)(1). Avoiding the requirements of § 7011(a) was not and could not be a violation of § 5603(a)(1), since the latter statute was limited in applicability to a different set of regulatory provisions.”
United States v. Deodies Curry & Shirley Pierce Curry, 428 F.2d 785 (9th Cir. 1970). “26 U.S.C. § 5603 and § 5601(a) (4), which provide it shall be illegal to carry on the business of distillers without having given bond; and 26 U.”
United States v. Balistrieri, 346 F. Supp. 341 (E.D. Wis. 1972). “It is alleged that such failures constitute violations of 26 U.S.C. § 5603 (a) (1). Mr. Balistrieri contends that each of these counts fails to state an offense against the United States.”
Guzman-Perez v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (D.P.R. 2019). “Rivera Castro pleaded guilty to a one count Information which charged her with failing to keep documents or make required entries in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5603 (b). Tr. 636-44. On June 19, 2015, the OIG determined that there was “reason to believe” fraud may have been…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.