- 7 -
In Estate of Mueller v. Commissioner, supra, we concluded
that, because the foundation of our jurisdiction was an estate
tax deficiency, the case did not fall within the scope of section
6214(b), which speaks only in terms of determinations of "a
deficiency of income tax for any taxable year or of gift tax for
any calendar year or calendar quarter". Under these
circumstances, we held that we had jurisdiction to permit the
petitioner to offset a barred income tax overpayment.
Respondent urges us to overrule Estate of Mueller and return
to the historical picture that evolved from Commissioner v. Gooch
Milling & Elevator Co., 320 U.S. 418 (1943), and reflected a
consistent denial of our jurisdiction to allow equitable
recoupment. This we will not do.
Alternatively, respondent argues that because income tax
deficiencies are the basis of our jurisdiction herein, Estate of
Mueller is distinguishable and section 6214(b) clearly applies.
We disagree. In focusing on the opening language of section
6214(b), respondent ignores the concluding language of the
section, which speaks in terms of our not having "jurisdiction to
determine whether or not the tax for any other year or calendar
quarter has been overpaid or underpaid" (emphasis added). We
think this language means that, at most, section 6214(b) may
operate to preclude us from determining the income tax or gift
tax for any prior period. In this connection, we note that in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011