- 175 - would result in unfair surprise to petitioner where it was raised for the first time on brief. See Aero Rental v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 331, 338 (1975). Since respondent has not asserted the higher stipulated figure, we are limited to the $17,943.61 alleged in the amendment to answer. We are similarly limited with respect to certain of respondent's assertions for 1974 and 1976. With regard to 1974, the notice of deficiency determined that there was $414,855.46 in unreported "per books" income from GM. Although the facts indicate that there were payments listed on the CTC receipts journal attributed to Diesel Power in excess of that amount, respondent did not assert a higher amount for that portion of the deficiency. Respondent will be limited to the asserted amount. For 1976, the total amount attributed to Diesel Power on the 1976 CTC receipts journal was $1,142,908.40. The notice of deficiency, however, determined "per books unreported" income of $1,112,550.51. Respondent will be limited to assertions for the latter amount. Respondent contends that all GM payments to the Zand FNCB London account and all GM payments attributed to Diesel Power on the CTC receipts journal should have been included in petitioner's income for 1973 through 1977. Petitioner, on the other hand, claims that Diesel Power was GM's Iranian distributor and that the payments to the Zand FNCB London account during 1973 through 1977 belonged only to Diesel Power. We disagree withPage: Previous 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011