D. G. Smalley and Nell R. Smalley - Page 12




                                       - 12 -                                         
          such prejudice exists, it is of respondent’s own making.  Any               
          such prejudice, however, is speculative, premised as it is on the           
          supposed tax consequences in a year not before us of a legal                
          determination that we decline to reach.  The only year before us            
          is 1994, and we confine our determinations to that year.  See               
          Christensen v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-254, affd. without             
          published opinion 142 F.3d 442 (9th Cir. 1998).                             
               Moreover, petitioners’ receipt argument is based on the                
          application of section 1031 and respondent’s regulations                    
          thereunder–-the same section upon which the parties have based              
          their positions from the outset.  See Ware v. Commissioner,                 
          supra.  In invoking the application of these mandatory provisions           
          of the section 1031 regulations, petitioners appeal to the                  
          correct application of the law on the basis of the record                   
          presented.  Neither party has suggested that the record contains            
          insufficient facts to permit us to dispose of the case on the               
          grounds of petitioners’ alternative argument.  We conclude that             
          the record is sufficient for this purpose and that we may                   
          properly decide this case on the grounds raised in petitioners’             
          alternative argument.4                                                      

               4 We are mindful that in Chase v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 874,           
          883 (1989), this Court rejected the taxpayers’ alternative                  
          argument, raised for the first time on brief, that if sec.                  
          1031(a) were inapplicable to the transaction in question, then              
          they should be allowed to elect installment sale treatment under            
          former sec. 453.  The Court based its holding partly on the                 
                                                             (continued...)           





Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011