- 6 -
In the absence of any evidence of legislative purpose
warranting a different approach,7 “we must assume that Congress
meant what it said and that the statutory language should be
taken at face value.” Cal-Maine Foods, Inc. v. Commissioner, 93
T.C. 181, 209 (1989). The language of section 7486 provides for
abatement and refund of the “amount of the deficiency determined”
by this Court that has been “disallowed in whole or in part by
the court of review”, regardless of whether the taxpayer files a
claim for relief. The statute simply acts as a procedural device
ensuring that the Commissioner follows a decision of the court of
review in situations where it can be ascertained that all or a
part of the amount of the deficiency determined by this Court was
disallowed. Where the court of review reverses and remands but
does not indicate that any ascertainable “amount” of the
previously determined deficiency has been precluded, it cannot be
said that the court of review has “disallowed in whole or in
part” the “amount of the deficiency determined by the Tax Court.”
7The legislative history of sec. 7486 (originally enacted as
sec. 1001(d) by the Internal Revenue Act of 1926, ch. 27, 44
Stat. 110, amended by the Internal Revenue Act of 1928, ch. 852,
45 Stat. 873, designated as sec. 1146 in the Internal Revenue
Code of 1939, and becoming sec. 7486 under the Internal Revenue
Code of 1954) lacks any indication of congressional intent on the
issue involved. See H. Rept. 1, 69th Cong., 1st Sess. (1925),
1939-1 C.B. (Part 2) 315, 327-329; S. Rept. 52, 69th Cong., 1st
Sess. (1926), 1939-1 C.B. (Part 2) 332, 357-360; Conf. Rept. 356,
69th Cong., 1st Sess. (1926), 1939-1 C.B. (Part 2) 361, 378-379;
H. Rept. 1337, 83d Cong., 2d Sess. A434 (1954); S. Rept. 1622,
83d Cong., 2d Sess. 614 (1954).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011