Bruce L. Brosi - Page 5




                                        - 5 -                                         
          moving party, here respondent, bears the burden of proving that             
          there is no genuine issue of material fact, and all factual                 
          inferences will be read in the light most favorable to                      
          petitioner, the nonmoving party.  Dahlstrom v. Commissioner, 85             
          T.C. 812, 821 (1985); Jacklin v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 340, 344             
          (1982).  However, the nonmoving party is required “to go beyond             
          the pleadings and by” his “own affidavits, or by the                        
          ‘depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on                 
          file,’ designate ‘specific facts showing that there is a genuine            
          issue for trial.’”  Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324             
          (1986) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)); see Rauenhorst v.                   
          Commissioner, 119 T.C. 157, 175 (2002); FPL Group, Inc. & Subs.             
          v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 554, 560 (2000).  Of course, the                  
          nonmoving party need not “produce evidence in a form admissible             
          at trial in order to avoid summary judgment.”  Celotex Corp. v.             
          Catrett, supra at 324.                                                      
               Section 6512 grants this Court limited jurisdiction to                 
          determine and award overpayments of tax to taxpayers.2  However,            
          the amount of any refund which this Court can award is restricted           
          according to when the overpayment was made.  Section 6512(b)(3)             


               2Specifically, sec. 6512(b)(1) provides:  “if the Tax Court            
          finds that there is no deficiency and further finds the taxpayer            
          has made an overpayment of income tax * * * the Tax Court shall             
          have jurisdiction to determine the amount of such overpayment,              
          and such amount shall, when the decision of the Tax Court has               
          become final, be credited or refunded to the taxpayer.”                     






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011