- 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 CourtPage: 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