- 4 -
1996 rollover, which claim still could be acted upon. Respondent
further explained that “the issuance of the 1994 statutory notice
should not be used as a means to deny petitioner the benefit of
the election for 1994.”
We understand from petitioner’s testimony that she would
like to roll over the gain from the sale of the second house she
sold (the 2105 house) rather than the gain realized from the sale
of the first house she sold (the Ridgefield house). She
explained that her accountant incorrectly rolled over the gain
from the sale of the Ridgefield house on her Form 1040X for 1994.
She also testified that her accountant had incorrectly reported
the sale of the 2105 house as the sale of rental property on her
1996 Form 1040.
Although we are sympathetic to petitioner’s situation, we
are unable to address her 1996 tax year. This is a court of
limited jurisdiction. See sec. 7442. We lack jurisdiction to
redetermine petitioner’s tax liability in years for which the
Commissioner has not issued a notice of deficiency. See secs.
6213(a) and 6214(a) and (b). The only notice of deficiency
issued to petitioner was with respect to her 1994 tax year.
Petitioner’s rollover of gain from the sale of the
Ridgefield house into the 2106 house comports with the
requirements of section 1034. The provisions of section 1034 are
mandatory; a taxpayer cannot elect to have gain recognized under
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011