American Air Liquide, Inc. and Subsidiaries - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         
          regulations that may be promulgated at a later date and that may            
          provide a special rule”.  (Emphasis added).  The Court of Appeals           
          for the Third Circuit when discussing the same reserved provision           
               the Office of the Federal Register, Document Drafting                  
               Handbook (1991), * * * describes “reserved” as “a term                 
               used to maintain the continuity of codification in the                 
               CFR” or “to indicate where future text will be added.”                 
               Id. at 27.  We find nothing in the precedent that * *                  
               *[the taxpayer] cites to preclude the Commissioner from                
               using the term “reserved” in accordance with the                       
               Document Drafting Handbook, rather than to connote the                 
               absence of a substantive rule. [Connecticut Gen. Life                  
               Ins. Co. v. Commissioner, 177 F.3d at 145.]                            
          We see no reason to take a different view in this case.  The                
          reserved paragraph as a general rule only indicates a place mark            
          in the regulation that is reserved to preserve continuity of                
          codification where the Department of the Treasury is considering            
          its position.                                                               
               Petitioner, in its memorandum of law in support, seeks to              
          distinguish Connecticut Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. Commissioner,                 
          supra, on the basis that unlike the facts in that case, in the              
          instant case, “the meaning ascribed to the Reserved Paragraph by            
          the Petitioner is unambiguously supported by numerous public                
          written statements of similarly affected taxpayers, and is not              
          contradicted in any of numerous public statements made by senior            
          Treasury Department and other governmental officials addressing             
          the issue”.  Petitioner attached to its response to respondent’s            
          motion for judgment on the pleadings exhibits A through H.  These           

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011