- 12 - of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed but did so on the grounds that we lacked jurisdiction to apply the doctrine. See Estate of Mueller v. Commissioner, 153 F.3d at 307. In Estate of Branson v. Commissioner, supra at 10-11, however, we expressly considered the ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. We declined then to alter our stand on the issue of equitable recoupment for the reasons previously discussed and, believing these reasons still valid, we likewise decline to do so now. Thus, in accordance with the position of this Court regarding our authority to grant equitable recoupment relief, and with respondent’s concession that petitioners meet the requirements of the defense, petitioners would be entitled to recoup the barred estate tax overpayment against the stipulated income tax deficiencies. We therefore turn to whether, under the rule of Golsen v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 742 (1970), the decision by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Continental Equities, Inc. v. Commissioner, 551 F.2d 74 (5th Cir. 1977), demands a contrary result. C. The Golsen Rule and the Eleventh Circuit In Golsen v. Commissioner, supra at 757, this Court established the rule that we shall “follow a Court of Appeals decision which is squarely in point where appeal from our decision lies to that Court of Appeals” (the Golsen rule). We subsequently have further clarified the doctrine’s reach,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