Larry Becraft made us aware of theses two cases. David brought these up on the call last Wednesday.
Bates v. United States, 581 F.2d 575, 579 (6th Cir. 1978):
"It is clear that regulations may not be used to supply supposed omissions in a revenue act or to enlarge the scope of such a statute." Busey v. Deshler Hotel Co., 130 F.2d 187, 190 (6th Cir. 1942). Nor may a regulation be used to alter or amend a statute by prescribing requirements which are inconsistent with its language.
Acker v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 258 F.2d 568, 573 (6th Cir. 1958), aff'd, 361 U.S. 87, 80 S.Ct. 144, 4 L.Ed.2d 127 (1959); 1 Mertens, Law of Federal Income Taxation (1974 Rev.) § 3.21, p. 46.
Reardon v. United States, 491 F.2d 822, 824 (10th Cir.
1974):
“Administrative regulations are not absolute rules of law, however, and should not be followed when they conflict with the design of the Code or exceed the administrative authority granted. National Labor Relations Board v. Boeing Co., 412 U.S. 67, 93 S.Ct. 1952, 36 L.Ed.2d 752 (1973); Dorfman v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 394 F.2d 651 (2nd Cir. 1968). The
Commissioner cannot promulgate regulations which impose a tax on the taxpayers which has not been imposed by legislative command.”
