- 25 -
with in any specific instance.5 The power to determine the
validity of a notice of deficiency is one that clearly is within
this Court’s arsenal of powers. The exercise of this power does
not draw us into the uncertainties of limitations periods and
restrictions on assessments that may well result from other
proposals.
Although invalidation of the notice of deficiency may
provide a windfall to some taxpayers, such windfalls are wholly
within the power, and it may be, the technology, of the
Commissioner to eliminate entirely.
Invalidating the notice of deficiency under these
circumstances may be regarded as legislating, but--
We often must legislate interstitially to iron out
inconsistencies within a statute or to fill gaps resulting
from legislative oversight or to resolve ambiguities
resulting from a legislative compromise. [U.S. Bulk
Carriers v. Arguelles, 400 U.S. 351, 354 (1971); fn. ref.
omitted.]
Invalidating the notice of deficiency is consistent with the
statutory scheme; it will put the shotgun back behind the door.
We have on other occasions refrained from such interstitial
legislation and left the statute with meaningless provisions.
5Sec. 7522(a) provides that notices of deficiency and other
specified documents must include descriptions of the bases for
certain matters. The adequacy of any such description may fairly
be open to dispute. The statute provides that “An inadequate
description * * * shall not invalidate such notice.” This
contrasts sharply with the requirement of sec. 3463(a) of the
1998 Act, where proper compliance ordinarily is not open to
dispute.
Page: Previous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011