- 3 - Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). The moving party bears the burden of proving that there is no genuine issue of material fact, and factual inferences will be read in a manner most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment. Dahlstrom v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 812, 821 (1985); Jacklin v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 340, 344 (1982). We are satisfied that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that a decision may be rendered as a matter of law with regard to the period of limitations that is applicable in this case. As explained in detail below, we shall deny petitioners’ motion for partial summary judgment. Background On August 26, 1996, petitioners filed a joint Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, for 1995. Petitioners’ 1995 tax return included a Form 2119, Sale of Your Home.2 Petitioners reported in part I of the Form 2119 that they: (1) Sold their “main home” in Solvang, California (the Solvang property), on August 4, 1995; (2) realized a gain of $511,587 on the sale of the Solvang property; and (3) had not purchased or built a new main home. Part I, line 9 of the Form 2119 asked in pertinent part: “If you haven’t replaced your home, do you plan to do so 2 The Form 2119 consisted of three distinct parts: Part I-–Gain on Sale; Part II-–One-Time Exclusion of Gain for People Age 55 or Older; and Part III–-Adjusted Sales Price, Taxable Gain, and Adjusted Basis of New Home.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011