- 6 -
otherwise valid claim. As a result of our valuation of the stock
includable in Mueller's estate, see Estate of Mueller v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-284, and the taxpayer's failure to
claim a large previously taxed property credit on its Federal
estate tax return, it became apparent that there was no
deficiency in estate tax; rather, the taxpayer was entitled to
recover an overpayment of estate tax, regardless of equitable
recoupment. Inasmuch as application of equitable recoupment
under these circumstances would have increased the amount the
taxpayer was entitled to recover as an overpayment, rather than
reduce a deficiency, we held that equitable recoupment was not
available. The taxpayer appealed. The Court of Appeals for the
Sixth Circuit affirmed Mueller III, on the ground that this Court
lacked jurisdiction to consider the affirmative defense of
equitable recoupment. See Estate of Mueller v. Commissioner,
supra.
The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit interpreted
sections 6214(b) and 6512(b) together to
explicitly confer on the Tax Court jurisdiction to do
no more than determine the amount of the deficiency
before it. The Tax Court's jurisdiction cannot extend
beyond its statutory confines to encompass an equitable
remedy such as recoupment because the Tax Court "is a
court of limited jurisdiction and lacks general
equitable powers," and because "[t]he Tax Court and its
divisions shall have such jurisdiction as is conferred
on on them by [Title 26]." * * * [Estate of Mueller v.
Commissioner, 153 F.3d at 305; citations omitted.]
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011