- 12 -
the matter raised in either of the deficiency notices mailed to
petitioner. The matter likewise was not placed in dispute in
either of the petitions filed herein or in respondent's answers
thereto.7 As a consequence, respondent may only raise the issue
of the correct amount of petitioner's general business credits
for the years in issue by obtaining leave to file an amendment to
her answer pursuant to Rule 41(a).
Whether leave will be granted to file an amendment to answer
is a question falling within the sound discretion of the Court,
and the disposition of such a motion turns largely on whether the
matter is raised in a timely fashion so as not to prejudice the
taxpayer. Waterman v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 344, 349-350 (1988);
Ross Glove Co. v. Commissioner, 60 T.C. 569, 595 (1973).
Upon due consideration of the matter, we shall deny
respondent's Motion for Leave to File Amendment to Answer filed
in docket No. 26352-93. As previously mentioned, approximately
21 months passed between the filing of the petition in this case
and the filing of respondent's Motion for Leave to File Amendment
to Answer. It was during this period that the parties filed a
stipulation of settled issues with the Court resolving the vast
majority of the issues then in dispute in docket No. 26352-93.
As we see it, the stipulation of settled issues, like a contract,
7 Nor did respondent seek to amend within 30 days after
service of her respective answers. Rule 41(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011