- 4 -
In their petition, petitioners contend: (1) Petitioners were
not negligent or did not intentionally disregard rules and
regulations; (2) the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) did not
respond to petitioners' request to inform petitioners as to how
the IRS made its negligence determination; and (3) that the
statute of limitations bars respondent's action in this matter.3
Petitioners concede that the issue in this case is identical
to the issue in Rambacher I and have stipulated that record into
this case. Since the issue decided by Rambacher I is identical
to the issue in this case, we issued an Order to Show Cause
(order) on November 16, 1999, asking petitioners to demonstrate
why this case should not be decided on the same grounds as
Rambacher I. Petitioners’ response to the order was filed with
this Court on December 16, 1999.
The doctrine of collateral estoppel, sometimes called issue
preclusion, generally “applies to tax proceedings involving
similar claims containing the same legal points, or different tax
years, when there has been no change in the controlling facts or
applicable legal principles.” Continental Oil Co. v. Jones, 80
F. Supp. 340, 343 (W.D. Okla. 1948), affd. 176 F.2d 519 (10th
Cir. 1949); see also Commissioner v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591, 598-
599 (1948). Collateral estoppel has “the dual purpose of
3 Petitioners now concede that the statute of limitations does
not bar an assessment with respect to the 1983 tax year.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011