Estate of James A. Beaton, Deceased, Shirley Beaton, Executrix, and Shirley Beaton - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         
          respondent mailed the notices of deficiency for 1985.                       
          Petitioners filed their tax returns for 1985 on or before April             
          15, 1986.                                                                   
               In the answers for 1985 respondent contends that if the                
          Court holds in petitioners’ dockets for 1984 that the Junior                
          Common Stock--Series A converted into common stock in 1985, then            
          the period of limitations for 1985 is open as a result of                   
          mitigation under sections 1311-1314.  Respondent does not deny              
          that, otherwise, the period of limitation is closed.  In the                
          replies petitioners deny that the mitigation provisions apply for           
          1985.                                                                       
               Petitioners’ dockets for 1984 were consolidated for trial,             
          briefing, and opinion with six other dockets; the Court held in             
          Steiner v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-122, that the Junior               
          Common Stock--Series A converted into common stock at some point            
          in 1985.  The Court entered decisions in petitioners’ dockets for           
          1984 on February 12, 1996.  On July 23, 1996, the Court of                  
          Appeals for the Tenth Circuit dismissed respondent’s appeal in              
          the Steiners’ docket.  On August 8, 1996, the Court of Appeals              
          for the Ninth Circuit dismissed respondent’s appeal in the                  
          Beatons’ docket.  Respondent did not file any petition for                  
          certiorari, and our decisions became final in due course.                   
                                     Discussion                                       
               Respondent contends that the mitigation provisions under               
          sections 1311-1314 do not open the period of limitations for                




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011