- 3 - petitioner's general business credit, it is clear from the context that petitioner raised the issue as a purely computational matter. Respondent filed her answer to the petition on January 31, 1994, including therein a general admission that the computation of petitioner's general business credit is dependent upon the resolution of the substantive issues in dispute. By notice dated May 26, 1994, this case was calendared for trial to be held in Washington, D.C., on October 31, 1994. On June 30, 1994, the parties filed a Joint Motion for Continuance stating that one of the central issues in dispute would be resolved consistent with the Court's final decision in docket No. 740-92 (Tate & Lyle, Inc. v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 656 (1994), on appeal (3d Cir., May 9, 1995)), and that the parties desired additional time to attempt to settle the remaining issues without a trial. The parties' motion was granted on July 5, 1994. By notice dated September 29, 1994, this case was again calendared for trial to be held in Washington, D.C., on March 6, 1995. On February 3, 1995, the parties filed a Joint Motion for Continuance along with a Stipulation of Settled Issues. In their Joint Motion for Continuance, the parties reported that: (1) although the Court had issued its opinion in docket No. 740-92, Tate & Lyle, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra, respondent was contemplating filing an appeal in the case; and (2) the parties had reached a settlement with respect to all but one of thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011