Limited Gaming of America, Inc. - Page 10




                                               - 10 -                                                  
            determined that Sunrise was not a separate entity.  We agree with                          
            respondent.                                                                                
                  In Bachner v. Commissioner, 109 T.C. 125, 130-131 (1997),                            
            affd. without published opinion 172 F.3d 859 (3d Cir. 1988), we                            
            stated:                                                                                    
                        Under the principles established by the Supreme                                
                  Court in Lewis v. Reynolds, 284 U.S. 281 (1932), a                                   
                  taxpayer’s claim for refund must be reduced by the                                   
                  amount of the correct tax liability for the taxable                                  
                  year, regardless of the fact that the Commissioner can                               
                  no longer assess any deficiency for the taxable year.                                
                  In Lewis v. Reynolds, supra, the taxpayer filed a claim                              
                  for refund alleging that certain deductions had been                                 
                  improperly disallowed by the Commissioner after the                                  
                  period of limitations on additional assessment had                                   
                  expired.  The Commissioner agreed with the taxpayer                                  
                  that the period of limitations had expired but denied a                              
                  refund on the basis that the correct computation of tax                              
                  resulted in additional tax.  The taxpayer argued that                                
                  the Commissioner lacked the authority to redetermine                                 
                  the tax after the period of limitations had expired.                                 
                  The Supreme Court disagreed.                                                         
                        While no new assessment can be made, after                                     
                        the bar of the statute has fallen, the                                         
                        taxpayer, nevertheless, is not entitled to a                                   
                        refund unless he has overpaid his tax. * * *                                   
                              *     *     *     *    *    *    *                                       
                        An overpayment must appear before refund is                                    
                        authorized.  Although the statue of                                            
                        limitations may have barred the assessment                                     
                        and collection of any additional sum, it does                                  
                        not obliterate the right to the United States                                  
                        to retain payments already received when they                                  
                        do not exceed the amount which might have                                      
                        been properly assessed and demanded. [Lewis                                    
                        v. Reynolds, supra at 283.]                                                    
                        The doctrine established in Lewis v. Reynolds,                                 
                  supra, has been applied by this Court in the                                         
                  determination of an overpayment.  See Connecticut Light                              





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011