- 12 -
limitations may have barred the assessment and collection of any
additional sum, it does not obviate the right of the United
States to retain payments already received when they do not
exceed the amount which might have been properly assessed and
demanded. Id. at 283.
Rev. Rul. 81-87 merely restates the holding in Lewis v.
Reynolds, supra. Angle v. United States, 996 F.2d 252, 255-256
(10th Cir. 1993). Rev. Rul. 81-87 provides that when the
taxpayers timely file a claim that would reduce their taxes, the
IRS, in determining whether they are to receive a credit or
refund will consider all proper adjustments, whether or not
time-barred. It makes clear, however, that the claimants may
recover only on the claim, which they filed before expiration of
the period of limitations, and then only to the extent to which
they would be entitled to a refund if their tax liability were
properly calculated without regard to the statute of limitations.
Neither Lewis v. Reynolds, supra, nor Rev. Rul. 81-87,
supra, helps petitioners here. The additional tax and the
overpayment resulted from carrying back NOLs arising in different
years. The Commissioner cannot be expected to ferret out all
conceivable upward adjustments to a taxpayer's liability when
making a refund determination. See Angle v. United States, supra
at 256; Herrington v. United States, 416 F.2d 1029, 1032 (10th
Cir. 1969). Although the Supreme Court concluded in Lewis that
respondent has an implied power to audit a taxpayer's return when
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011