Penny J. Sutherland - Page 19




                                       - 19 -                                         
              In sum, we hold that the retroactive application of the 1998            
         amendment does not deny petitioner due process of the law;  thus,            
         it is constitutional.                                                        
              In reaching our conclusions, we have considered all of                  
         petitioner’s arguments (namely, whether: (1) The doctrine of                 
         estoppel applies; (2) the duty of consistency owed to petitioner was         
         violated; and (3) events that occurred before the issuance of the            
         notice of deficiency may be considered) for a result contrary to             
         that expressed herein, and to the extent not discussed above, find           
         them to be without merit.                                                    
              To reflect the foregoing,                                               


                                                        Decision will be              
                                                 entered for respondent.              
























Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  

Last modified: May 25, 2011