- 3 -
The notice of deficiency also determined that petitioner was
not entitled to income averaging for the taxable years 1981 and
1982 because he was unable to substantiate the base period
years.2 An amendment to petition was filed wherein petitioner
claimed entitlement to income averaging for the taxable years
1980 and 1981.3
Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation and
avoid unnecessary and expensive trials. Florida Peach Corp. v.
Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988). Summary judgment may be
granted with respect to all or any part of the legal issues in
controversy--
if the pleadings, answers to interrogatories,
depositions, admissions, and any other acceptable
materials, together with the affidavits, if any, show
that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact
and that a decision may be rendered as a matter of law.
Rule 121(b); Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985).
Given that the parties have filed cross-motions for partial
summary judgment, it is apparent that each of them believes that
the issue before us is ripe for summary adjudication and that
there is no genuine issue as to any material fact.
2 No taxable income was reported on the 1980 return; thus,
income averaging was not utilized.
3 The respective motions filed by the parties do not
discuss the issue of income averaging for the taxable year 1982;
accordingly, the Court assumes that the parties have resolved
that question.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011