- 3 -
In T.C. Memo. 1997-477, we decided that petitioners were not
entitled to defer recognition of gain under section 1031, the
gain was recognizable in 1989, petitioners did not qualify for
installment sales treatment to place income in 1990, and
petitioners were liable for the section 6663 fraud penalty for
1989.
Under Rule 155(a), parties are required to submit
"computations pursuant to the Court's determination of the
issues, showing the correct amount of the deficiency, liability,
or overpayment to be entered as the decision." Parties are not
permitted to raise new issues or matters in connection with the
Rule 155 computations. Bankers Pocahontas Coal Co. v. Burnet,
287 U.S. 308 (1932). The starting point for the computation is
the statutory notice of deficiency from which the parties compute
the redetermined deficiency based upon matters agreed by the
parties or ruled upon by the Court. Home Group, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 91 T.C. 265, 269 (1988), affd. 875 F.2d 377 (2d
Cir. 1989); Whitham v. Commissioner, a Memorandum Opinion of this
Court dated Jan. 30, 1953.
Petitioners, in their proffered computation, filed
December 11, 1997, objected to respondent's 1989 computation on
several grounds. First, because we found that petitioners'
transactions were sales and not like-kind exchanges, they contend
that the $3,969,000 of sales proceeds used by respondent should
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011