- 6 -
In Millsap v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 926 (1988), we addressed
the issue of whether a section 6020(b) return made by the
Commissioner was a “separate return” filed by “an individual”
under section 6013(b)(1). We held that in order to provide a
“rational meaning” for the term “individual”, section 6013(b)(1)
should not be interpreted to include a return prepared by
respondent under section 6020(b). Id. at 936-937. Similarly, in
order for the references to the term “taxpayer” in section
6211(a) to have any “rational meaning”, section 6211(a) should be
interpreted to exclude returns which are prepared by the
Commissioner.
There are other examples where this Court has interpreted
references in the Code to the term “return” as not including a
return prepared by the Commissioner. For example, in Healer v.
Commissioner, 115 T.C. 316 (2000), we held that a section 6020(b)
return was not a return filed by the taxpayer for purposes of
section 6511. Likewise, Congress has expressly or impliedly
limited the application of section 6020(b)(2). Under section
6501(b)(3), “Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2) of
section 6020(b), the execution of a return by the Secretary
pursuant to the authority conferred by such section shall not
start the running of the period of limitations on assessment and
5(...continued)
(2) the amount of rebates, as defined in
subsection (b)(2), made.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011