- 9 -
reached, the bankruptcy court's decision would bind the
debtor as to nondischargeable taxes and the Tax Court
would be governed by that decision under principles of
res judicata. [124 Cong. Rec. 32414 (1978)
(Representative Edwards); 124 Cong. Rec. 34014 (1978)
(Senator DeConcini); emphasis added.]
There is nothing in the Internal Revenue Code, the
Bankruptcy Code, or their legislative histories that remotely
suggests that by ruling on the merits of a tax dispute the
bankruptcy court ousts the Tax Court of jurisdiction over a case
that is pending before it. Cf. United States v. Wilson, supra.
Rather, it is clear that the principles of issue preclusion or
res judicata would apply to avoid duplicative litigation.
Irrespective of other arguments that may be made, this Court
still retains in personam jurisdiction over petitioner and
subject matter jurisdiction over her dispute with respondent.4
Period of Limitations and Jurisdiction
As we understand, petitioner's reasoning seems to be based
upon an assumption that the judgment of the bankruptcy court
constitutes a bar to the making of an assessment of the taxes at
issue. At the February 26, 1997, hearing on this motion
petitioner's counsel explained: "Section 505(c) of the
Bankruptcy Code is specific and clear: following determination
4 Compare sec. 7422(e) which provides that, if "prior to
the hearing" of a refund suit, the Secretary issues a notice of
deficiency for the same year and the taxpayer files a petition
with the Tax Court, the court before which the suit was pending
"shall lose jurisdiction * * * to whatever extent jurisdiction is
acquired by the Tax Court".
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