Grant K. Hagestad - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         

               The factual frame of reference herein is:  (1) petitioner              
          took a CLD of $321,002 on his 1987 return; (2) upon the audit of            
          that return, respondent disallowed the deduction but did not                
          determine a deficiency for that year because respondent removed             
          $360,000 of income included in that return on the ground that it            
          was properly includable in income for 1986; (3) by virtue of our            
          decision in Hagestad v. Commissioner, supra, respondent's                   
          position as to the includability of the $360,000 in income was              
          rejected, and petitioner's position that it was properly reported           
          in 1987 was sustained; (4) as a result of the expiration of the             
          3-year period of limitations in respect of 1987, the effect of              
          the foregoing events was to leave petitioner's 1987 return                  
          accepted as filed, thereby giving petitioner the full benefit of            
          the CLD which respondent had disallowed on audit; (5) petitioner,           
          based upon respondent's disallowance of the CLD for 1987 and the            
          suspension provisions of section 465(a)(2), applied a portion of            
          that deduction in an amended return for 1991 and received a                 
          refund in 1995.                                                             
               The question before us is whether, under the foregoing                 
          circumstances, respondent can obtain the benefit of the                     
          mitigation provisions.                                                      
               Respondent contends that petitioner received the benefit of            
          a CLD of $321,002 in 1987, and then again (to the extent of                 
          $171,318) in 1991 (by virtue of the 1995 refund), and that this             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011