APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA.
Hughes, Van Devanter, McReynolds, Brandeis, Sutherland, Butler, Stone, Roberts, Cardozo
MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.
This cause is here under the Criminal Appeals Act, March 2, 1907, c. 2564, 34 Stat. 1246 (U. S. C., Title 18, § 682) and § 238 Jud. Code (U. S. C., Title 28, § 345). It necessitates consideration of certain provisions of the Revenue Act of 1928, c. 852, 45 Stat. 791.
Section 52 of that Act commands corporations to make tax returns sworn to by designated officers. Section 146 (a) declares that any person required to make return who wilfully fails so to do shall be guilty of a misdemeanor; 146 (b) that any person who wilfully fails to collect or truthfully account for and pay over any tax, and any person who wilfully attempts to evade or defeat any tax shall be guilty of felony; and 146 (c) that "the term 'person' as used in this section includes an officer or employee of a corporation or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs."
Section 701 provides: "When used in this Act the term 'person' means an individual, a trust or estate, a partnership,
or a corporation"; also "the terms 'includes' and 'including' when used in a definition contained in this Act shall not be deemed to exclude other things otherwise within the meaning of the term defined."
Applicable portions of the Act are copied in the margin.*fn*
An indictment, in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, charged appellee Troy with violating § 146 (b) in that while president of the Troy Oil Company, Incorporated, he unlawfully, wilfully and knowingly attempted to defeat and evade a large part of the tax due from that corporation for 1929, by making a return for it which
falsely stated the gross income. The indictment was challenged because "it fails to set forth that the defendant was under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurred and in the absence of this averment the indictment fails to set forth facts showing prima facie, a commission of the crime charged in the indictment." The trial judge sustained the objection and quashed the indictment. In his view it was necessary that ...