Asa Investerings Partnership, Alliedsignal, Inc., Tax Matters Partner - Page 5




                                        - 5 -                                         
          1, 6-7 (1997); Asciutto v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-564,               
          affd. 26 F.3d 108 (9th Cir. 1994).4                                         
               Petitioner bases his motion to redetermine interest on our             
          prior decision in this case.  See ASA Investerings Pship. v.                
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-305, affd. 201 F.3d 505 (D.C. Cir.            
          2000).  Our prior decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeals             
          for the District of Columbia Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court            
          denied certiorari on October 2, 2000, 531 U.S. 871 (2000).  Our             
          decision became final on October 2, 2000.  Sec. 7481(a)(2)(B).              
          Petitioner mailed its motion to redetermine interest on October             
          1, 2001; thus, the motion was timely.  Sec. 7481(c)(1); Rule                
          261(a)(2).  Petitioner claims, and respondent does not dispute,             
          that it has paid the entire amount of the deficiency plus                   
          interest.  Accordingly, the only issue in the instant case is               
          whether respondent has assessed a deficiency and interest under             
          section 6215.                                                               



               4Sec. 7481(c) was added to the Code by the Technical and               
          Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988, Pub. L. 100-647, sec. 6246(a),           
          102 Stat. 3751.  On Aug. 5, 1997, the Taxpayer Relief Act of                
          1997, Pub. L. 105-34, 111 Stat. 788, 1054, revised sec. 7481(c)             
          to provide for the filing of a “motion” rather than a “petition”            
          and to clarify that our jurisdiction includes underpayments of              
          interest by the Commissioner.  See H. Conf. Rept. 105-220, at               
          732-733 (1997), 1997-4 C.B. (Vol. 2) 1457, 2202-2203.  Many of              
          our prior opinions, including Bankamerica Corp. v. Commissioner,            
          supra, addressed sec. 7481(c) as originally enacted.  However,              
          the same three requirements we identified in the original                   
          enactment are still apparent in revised sec. 7481(c), including             
          the requirement that an assessment has been made under sec. 6215.           





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011