Acme Steel Company (formerly known as Interlake, Inc., and now known as Acme Metals, Inc.) and Consolidated Subsidiaries - Page 26

                                       - 26 -                                         
               Respondent contends respondent paid the tentative refunds to           
          the correct taxpayer pursuant to the procedures under section               
          6411.  Respondent argues that when the tentative refunds were               
          subsequently disallowed, he could have recovered them through the           
          deficiency procedures, by filing a civil action to recover                  
          erroneous refunds under section 7405, or by summarily assessing             
          the deficiencies under section 6213(b)(3).                                  
               Respondent argues he is not collaterally estopped from                 
          arguing that the 1981 and 1984 refunds are not nonrebate refunds.           
          According to respondent, the issue litigated in the bankruptcy              
          court with respect to 1985 is not identical to the issue in the             
          case at hand.  The issue in the bankruptcy court was whether a              
          nonrebate refund was subject to the summary assessment procedures           
          of section 6213(b)(3).                                                      
               Respondent also contends collateral estoppel does not apply            
          because the bankruptcy court has not yet issued a final                     
          appealable order.  Respondent contends that final resolution in             
          the bankruptcy proceeding of petitioner’s tax liabilities for               
          1981, 1984, and 1985 depends on this Court’s entry of a decision            
          on the stipulation of settled issues.                                       
               The issue for decision in the case at hand is whether                  
          respondent can use the deficiency procedures of sections 6211-              
          6215 to recover the tentative refunds respondent paid petitioner.           
          Petitioner argues the Court lacks jurisdiction to enter a                   






Page:  Previous  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011