Interlake Corporation - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                          

               1981 and 1984, prespinoff years during which A                          
               controlled the group.  After review by the Internal                     
               Revenue Service, the requested tentative refunds were                   
               issued to P and A, respectively.  The tentative refunds                 
               issued to A were treated as rebate refunds with respect                 
               to P and the group for purposes of computing the                        
               group's deficiencies for 1981 and 1984.                                 
                    P contends that the tentative refunds in issue                     
               were paid to the wrong taxpayer, and therefore the                      
               tentative refunds do not constitute rebate refunds.  R                  
               concedes that a refund issued to the wrong taxpayer, or                 
               to an unauthorized representative of the taxpayer is a                  
               nonrebate refund that may not be taken into account in                  
               determining the taxpayer's deficiency.  However, R                      
               contends that payment to A was proper because A was an                  
               authorized representative of the group for purposes of                  
               the issuance of the tentative refunds.                                  
                    Held:  The tentative refunds constitute nonrebate                  
               refunds with respect to P and the group because A's                     
               authority to act for the group, at least with respect                   
               to the issuance and receipt of the tentative refunds,                   
               terminated when A's affiliation with the group                          
               terminated.  Accordingly, A was not an authorized                       
               recipient of the tentative refunds, and respondent                      
               cannot seek recovery of the tentative refunds from P                    
               through the deficiency procedures.  Union Oil Co. v.                    
               Commissioner, 101 T.C. 130 (1993), distinguished.                       

               John M. Newman, Jr., and Kenneth E. Updegraft, Jr., for                 
               Lawrence C. Letkewicz, for respondent.                                  

               WELLS, Judge:  This matter is before the Court on the                   
          parties' cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to Rule                 
          121(a).  Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are              
          to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the taxable years in              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011