26 U.S.C. § 6202
Establishment by regulations of mode or time of assessment
If the mode or time for the assessment of any internal revenue tax (including interest, additional amounts, additions to the tax, and assessable penalties) is not otherwise provided for, the Secretary may establish the same by regulations.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1968–2021 · leading case: Khan v. BDO Seidman, LLP, 948 N.E.2d 132 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011).
Khan v. BDO Seidman, LLP, 948 N.E.2d 132 (Ill. App. Ct. 2011). “26 U.S.C. §6202 (2006); 26 C.F.R. §301 .6213—1(a) (2009).”
Smith v. United States, 475 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2006). “26 U.S.C. § 6202 , by failing to make an assessment of the taxes owed by Plaintiffs within the time and mode set forth by the Secretary of the Treasury; 4.”
Ramer v. United States, 620 F. Supp. 2d 90 (D.D.C. 2009). “§ 6201 (a) (2006) (Count 4); (5) failed to make assessments for taxes and penalties within the time and mode set forth by the Secretary of the Treasury as required by 26 U.S.C. § 6202 (2006) (Count 5); (6) neglected to assess taxes owed by the plaintiffs within three years as…”
Kim v. United States, 618 F. Supp. 2d 31 (D.D.C. 2009). “70 (Count 12); • Failure to comply with statutory limits on the Secretary of the Treasury’s regulatory authority, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 6202 (Count 13); • Failure to record and execute assessments in Plaintiffs’ names or to furnish Plaintiffs with copies of these…”
Neal v. Regan, 587 F. Supp. 1558 (N.D. Ind. 1984). “26 U.S.C. § 6202 and § 6203 empower the Secretary to establish methods for making such assessments.”
De Jesus v. United States (In Re De Jesus), 268 B.R. 185 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2001). “2000) (citing 26 U.S.C. § 6202 8 and 26 CFR § 301 .-6203-1 9 ).”
O'Connell v. Minnesota Dep't of Revenue (In Re O'Connell), 246 B.R. 332 (8th Cir. BAP 2000). “26 U.S.C. § 6202 ; 26 C.F.R. § 301.6203-1 .”
Calen v. United States (E.D.N.Y 2020). “§ 7433 claim based on Defendant’s negligent and reckless disregard of either 26 U.S.C. § 6202 or various provisions of the Internal Revenue Manual be denied as futile.”
Calen v. United States (E.D.N.Y 2021). “§ 7433 claim based on Defendant’s negligent and reckless disregard of either 26 U.S.C. § 6202 or various provisions of the Internal Revenue Manual be denied as futile without leave to amend.”
Miskovsky v. United States, 290 F. Supp. 403 (W.D. Pa. 1968). “Possibly the Treasury could deal appropriately with the circumstances when amended returns should be permitted by Regulations under 26 U.S.C. § 6202 . If not, Congress should give attention to the matter.”
Ramer v. United States Gov't (D.D.C. 2009). “§ 6201 (a) (2006) (Count 4); (5) failed to make assessments for taxes and penalties within the time and mode set forth by the Secretary of the Treasury as required by 26 U.S.C. § 6202 (2006) (Count 5); (6) neglected to assess taxes owed by the plaintiffs within three years as…”
Kim v. United States (D.D.C. 2009). “70 (Count 12); • Failure to comply with statutory limits on the Secretary of the Treasury’s regulatory authority, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 6202 (Count 13); • Failure to record and execute assessments in Plaintiffs’ names or to furnish Plaintiffs with copies of these…”
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.