ALLcrimesfood&drugstaxestelecomcommercehealthconservationtransportationagricultureveteransbrowse all titles »
0

26 U.S.C. § 6406 — Prohibition of administrative review of decisions

submitted 72 years ago by ch. 736 to r/title-26-INTERNAL-REVENUE-CODE · 92 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

This section addresses prohibition of administrative review of decisions. It states the duties, permissions, limits, and procedures provided in the section.

In the absence of fraud or mistake in mathematical calculation, the findings of fact in and the decision of the Secretary upon the merits of any claim presented under or authorized by the internal revenue laws and the allowance or non-allowance by the Secretary of interest on any credit or refund under the internal revenue laws must not, except as provided in subchapters C and D of chapter 76 (relating to the Tax Court), be subject to review by any other administrative or accounting officer, employee, or agent of the United States.

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

In the absence of fraud or mistake in mathematical calculation, the findings of fact in and the decision of the Secretary upon the merits of any claim presented under or authorized by the internal revenue laws and the allowance or non-allowance by the Secretary of interest on any credit or refund under the internal revenue laws shall not, except as provided in subchapters C and D of chapter 76 (relating to the Tax Court), be subject to review by any other administrative or accounting officer, employee, or agent of the United States.

Source credit: (Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 792; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, § 1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit
  • 1954Enacted · Act of Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736
  • 1976Amended · Pub. L. 94-455 · 90 Stat. 1834

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by ch. 736 on 1954-08-16.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

0/280

no arguments yet — make the first case