- 12 - petitioners have failed to pay the tax reported due on their original 1990 return, and respondent's rejection of their amended return, there is no basis for finding an abatement, credit, or refund in this case. Petitioners' reliance on Powerstein v. Commissioner, supra, likewise is misplaced. In Powerstein v. Commissioner, supra, the Commissioner issued a notice of deficiency to the taxpayers for the taxable years 1984 through 1988. After filing a petition with the Court, and after the Commissioner filed an answer, the taxpayers filed amended returns for the years in dispute in an apparently misguided effort to generate a net tax refund. The Commissioner accepted the amended returns in which the taxpayers reported increased tax liabilities and rejected the amended returns in which the taxpayers reported reduced tax liabilities. Under the particular facts of that case, we concluded that the Commissioner had erred in treating the increased taxes reported in the amended returns as amounts "shown upon his return" within the meaning of section 301.6211-1(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs. To the contrary, we held that the additional taxes represented amounts that the taxpayers were "protesting rather than admitting" within the meaning of the same regulation. Id. at 474. The facts presented in the instant case are readily distinguishable from those presented in Powerstein v.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011