26 U.S.C. § 7321
Authority to seize property subject to forfeiture
Any property subject to forfeiture to the United States under any provision of this title may be seized by the Secretary.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1960–1991 · leading case: Samuel Berkowitz v. United States of Am., Libellant, 340 F.2d 168 (1st Cir. 1965).
Samuel Berkowitz v. United States of Am., Libellant, 340 F.2d 168 (1st Cir. 1965). “§ 7302 , and was subject to forfeiture under the above-quoted 26 U.S.C. § 7321 : U. S. v. $3,960.81 etc.”
Jack Dailey McKeehan v. United States, 438 F.2d 739 (6th Cir. 1971). “§ 5872 (a), as amended in 1968, and 26 U.S.C. § 7321 (1964). 26 U.S.C. §§ 7323 , 7325 (1964).”
Maisano v. Welcher, 940 F.2d 499 (9th Cir. 1991). “Finally, the Maisanos contend that the IRS could not seize the Blazer because it was not subject to forfeiture pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7321 . The Maisanos are confusing “property subject to levy” with “property subject to forfeiture.”
United States v. Elmer Samuel Chapman, United States of Am. v. James Terrell Knight, 413 F.2d 440 (5th Cir. 1969). “All property found in the possession of any person intending to manufacture the same into property of a kind subject to tax for the purpose of selling such taxable property in fraud of the internal revenue laws, or with design to evade the payment of such tax, may also be…”
United States v. Gannon, 201 F. Supp. 68 (D. Mass. 1961). “” 26 U.S.C. § 7321 . But, without judicial process following a libel or a judicial or administrative warrant, and without the necessity of immediate seizure to prevent the escape of a moving vehicle caught, as it were, flagrante delicto, the Special Agents had no authority to…”
United States v. Two Lots of Ground, 183 F. Supp. 355 (E.D. Pa. 1960). “” Section 7321 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, 26 U.S.C.A. § 7321 . . Under Admiralty Rule 21, 28 U.”
United States v. Dubin, 217 F. Supp. 206 (D. Mass. 1963). “The government admits that the car was not taken under a warrant but was seized by the agents on administrative order of their superiors under 26 U.S.C.A. § 7321 . It is true that the fact that seizure of the auto *210 mobile was made without warrant is no bar to enforcement of…”
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.