William L. and Mary Lee Powell - Page 7

                                          7                                           
               In the motion to dismiss, respondent argues that the Court             
          does not have jurisdiction to redetermine petitioners' tax for              
          the years in issue to the extent that the amounts assessed by               
          respondent are attributable to the proper reporting of                      
          partnership items.                                                          
               Petitioners' shares of the losses and investment credit                
          basis of the partnership for 1982 and 1983 are partnership items.           
          Accordingly, we are without jurisdiction over the deficiencies              
          attributable to these items which were assessed as computational            
          adjustments.  Furthermore, petitioners agree that we are without            
          jurisdiction over the computational adjustments in this affected            
          items proceeding.  See Bradley v. Commissioner, 100 T.C. 367, 371           
          (1993); Saso v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 730, 734 (1989).                      
               Petitioners, however, argue that the investment tax credit             
          recapture reported on their 1984 return is an affected item, and            
          they contend that they overpaid taxes in 1984 as a result of                
          recognizing recapture of a portion of the investment credit                 
          respondent has since disallowed in taxable years 1982 and 1983.             
          Respondent counters that we do not have jurisdiction to offset              
          the taxes assessed for 1982 and 1983 by petitioners' alleged                
          overpayment in a year not before the Court.                                 
               As we understand it, petitioners' argument is that the                 
          affirmative defense of equitable recoupment applies and that the            








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

Last modified: May 25, 2011