Estate of Bessie I. Mueller, Deceased, John S. Mueller, Personal Representative - Page 73

                                               - 73 -                                                  
            installment sale resulting in capital gains.  The Commissioner                             
            acquiesced and allowed the taxpayers a refund for 1962 but not                             
            for earlier, barred years.  The taxpayers then sued for refunds                            
            of their overpayments for those earlier years, under the                                   
            alternative theories of mitigation and equitable recoupment.  The                          
            Court of Claims denied mitigation on the ground that the                                   
            Commissioner had not actively maintained inconsistent positions.                           
            The Court of Claims then denied equitable recoupment, primarily                            
            because it believed that mitigation, within its area of                                    
            applicability, preempts equitable recoupment, but also on the                              
            alternative ground that equitable recoupment can only be used to                           
            reduce the amount of deficiencies recoverable by the Government                            
            in later years, and there were no such deficiencies, just time-                            
            barred earlier years.  Brigham v. United States, 470 F.2d at                               
            577.28                                                                                     
                  Brigham’s language might, in isolation, like some language                           
            in Mueller II, 101 T.C. at 552, be extended to support                                     
            respondent’s view, but petitioner persuasively argues that such                            
            an extension would make no sense.  Under respondent’s view, this                           


                  28"When its benefits are sought by the taxpayer, the                                 
            function of the doctrine [of equitable recoupment] is to allow                             
            the taxpayer to reduce the amount of a deficiency recoverable by                           
            the Government by the amount of an otherwise barred overpayment                            
            of the taxpayer. * * * Here no such situation exists.  * * *                               
            Rather, the plaintiffs are attempting an extension of the                                  
            doctrine of equitable recoupment to the case of a refund of taxes                          
            for an otherwise barred year."  Brigham v. United States, 200 Ct.                          
            Cl. 68, 470 F.2d 571, 577 (1972).                                                          




Page:  Previous  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  78  79  80  81  82  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011