Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): property of the bankruptcy estate vests in the reorganized debtor, a new entity, and administration of the estate ceases.” U.S. v. Redmond, 36 B.R. 932, 934 (D.Kan.1984). The duty to pay federal income taxes is tied to the duty to make an income tax return. See Holywell Corporation v. Smith, 503 U.S. 47, 52, 112 S.Ct. 1021, 1024, 117 L.Ed.2d 196 (1992) (citing 26 U.S.C. § 6151(a), which provides, in part, “[W]hen a return of tax is required ... the person required to make such return shall ... pay such tax-”). Among the persons required to make returns of income are estates, trusts, and estates of individuals under Chapters 7 or 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. See 26 U.S.C. § 6012(a)(3),(a)(4), and (a)(9); see also In re I.J. Knight Realty Corp., 501 F.2d 62, 65 (3d Cir.1974) (<HOLDING>). The “[r]eturns of an estate, trust, or an 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that punitive damages are excludable from gross income under 26 usc  104a2 (B) holding that the phrase return of income used in 26 usc  6012 is synonymous with the phrase return of tax used in 26 usc  6151 (C) holding that the phrase or ganic diseases of the nervous system contained in 38 usc  11013 was ambiguous because the statute did not define the phrase (D) holding that the possibility of a mistaken understanding of the phrase preponderance of the evidence on the part of the jury is too remote to constitute plain error when counsel gave the jury an accurate explanation of the legal meaning of the phrase in his closing argument and that meaning is consistent with the common understanding of the words in the phrase (E) holding that punitive damages are not awarded on account of personal injuries or sickness pursuant to 26 usc  104a2 and therefore constitute gross income
Output (English): holding that the possibility of a mistaken understanding of the phrase preponderance of the evidence on the part of the jury is too remote to constitute plain error when counsel gave the jury an accurate explanation of the legal meaning of the phrase in his closing argument and that meaning is consistent with the common understanding of the words in the phrase