- 22 -
supplied). Respondent’s repurchase of the property from ACI did
not constitute a return of the property (or its monetary
equivalent) to its rightful owner (presumably, petitioner).
Accordingly, section 6343(b) has no application to the repurchase
of the property from ACI. But even if we were to assume, for
sake of argument, that section 6343(b) should be given the
peculiar application that petitioner urges upon us, it would not
follow that, having returned petitioner’s property to him,
respondent would be barred from adjusting petitioner’s 1990 tax
account accordingly.
At bottom, this is a classic case of petitioner’s wishing to
have his cake and eat it too, while pretending that the
Government got it. The statute does not support this result;
logic, equity, and common sense oppose it.
All other arguments raised by petitioner and not expressly
discussed herein are without merit or unnecessary to reach.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be
entered for respondent.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Last modified: May 25, 2011