Estate of Harry Orenstein - Page 11




                                       - 11 -                                         
               Considered together, these sections [sections 7422(e),                 
               6512(a), and 7481] indicate that “Congress intended the                
               Tax Court to have full judicial authority to resolve                   
               issues over which it has jurisdiction”.  Woods v.                      
               Commissioner, 92 T.C. * * * [776, 788 (1989)].  Judge                  
               Halpern further observed that                                          
                    the Code is structured to channel tax                             
                    litigation to the Tax Court.  We are the tax                      
                    forum of choice, because only here can the                        
                    tax liability be litigated prior to payment.                      
                    Understandably, we preside over the vast                          
                    majority of tax litigation. * * * [Estate of                      
                    Mueller v. Commissioner, supra at 564                             
                    (Halpern, J., concurring) (citations                              
                    omitted).]                                                        
                    If this Court lacked authority to consider                        
               equitable recoupment, a taxpayer without the practical                 
               ability to prepay the contested deficiency and sue for                 
               refund in a different forum would be precluded from                    
               raising a defense available to a more affluent taxpayer                
               who has the means to do so.  We do not believe that                    
               Congress intended this result. * * * [Estate of Branson                
               v. Commissioner, supra at 13-14.]                                      
               Confronted by the foregoing precedent, respondent argues               
          that the above cases were incorrectly decided and urges us to               
          adopt the position taken by the Court of Appeals for the Sixth              
          Circuit in Estate of Mueller v. Commissioner, 153 F.3d 302 (6th             
          Cir. 1998), affg. 107 T.C. 189 (1996).  After determining in                
          Estate of Mueller v. Commissioner, 101 T.C. at 561, that we could           
          consider an equitable recoupment claim, we held in Estate of                
          Mueller v. Commissioner, 107 T.C. at 199, that the taxpayer was             
          not entitled to such relief on the facts of the case.  The 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