Acme Steel Company (formerly known as Interlake, Inc., and now known as Acme Metals, Inc.) and Consolidated Subsidiaries - Page 37

                                       - 37 -                                         
          commodities contract with LTV, the shares in Olga Coal, and the             
          debt owed to petitioner by Olga Coal were not worthless as                  
          petitioner claimed on its 1986 return.  On the basis of the                 
          foregoing determinations, respondent determined that petitioner             
          did not sustain a CNOL in 1986 as claimed on its 1986 return.               
          Accordingly, respondent disallowed the carrybacks to 1981 and               
          1984 and issued a notice of deficiency to recover the tentative             
          refunds.                                                                    
               Respondent’s treatment of petitioner as the continuing                 
          common parent of the affiliated group and disallowance of the               
          claimed CNOL were “determinations” under section 6212(a) in the             
          same sense that respondent’s disallowance of the various credit             
          carrybacks, trade or business expenses, and charitable                      
          contributions for 1974-78, 1980-81, and 1983-84 were                        
          determinations.  See supra pp. 14-15.  Thus, the Court was vested           
          with jurisdiction when petitioner filed the timely petition, and            
          our jurisdiction has not been adversely affected by the                     
          subsequent litigation in Interlake Corp. v. Commissioner, 112               
          T.C. 103 (1999), and the bankruptcy proceeding.  Once we have               
          jurisdiction, it remains unimpaired until we decide the                     
          controversy.  GAF Corp. v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 519 (2000).  We           
          hold we have jurisdiction to enter a decision based on the                  
          stipulation of settled issues.                                              








Page:  Previous  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011