- 14 -
requirement of section 1313(a) or the more specific requirement
of section 1312(7)(A) that the court decision itself "determine
the basis" of the property. For example, in Knowles Elecs. Inc.
v. United States, 365 F.2d 43, 45 (7th Cir. 1966), a summary
dismissal of a mitigation claim was affirmed where, much like the
instant case, the alleged determination was based not on an
affirmative court opinion but rather on a general stipulation of
settlement between the parties (that did not specify the specific
underlying terms of the settlement) and on the court’s decision
reflecting only the general settlement agreement.
Petitioner acknowledges that there exists some support for
the proposition that a determination of basis under section
1312(7) need not expressly relate to basis to qualify as a
determination of basis where there is a determination of a matter
that necessarily must have included a determination of basis. In
Gooding v. United States, 164 Ct. Cl. 197, 326 F.2d 988, 993
(1964), in a prior decision, the Tax Court determined the
specific amount of gain to be realized on a transaction, and it
was concluded by the Court of Claims that such an affirmative
determination of gain by the Tax Court necessarily involved a
determination of the basis of property under section 1312(7). In
Gooding v. United States, 326 F.2d at 993, it was noted, however,
that where a court’s decision deals only incidentally or
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011