- 5 -
On March 19, 2003, the parties filed a stipulation of
settled issues, which reserved the issue of whether petitioners
“can offset tax deficiencies * * * through net operating loss
carry forwards or carrybacks.”
On April 22, 2003, which was after respondent had accepted
petitioners’ qualified offer, petitioners filed an amendment to
petition in each docket in which petitioners claimed deductions
for the NOLs in question. After the supplemental pleadings were
closed, respondent filed the subject Motion for Summary Judgment,
which petitioners now challenge.
Discussion
I. Summary Judgment
Petitioners do not challenge as a procedural matter
respondent’s motion for summary judgment, see Rule 121(a) and
(b), and it appears that all prerequisites for summary
adjudication have been satisfied, id.; Rule 121(d).
II. Contentions of the Parties
Respondent contends that respondent’s acceptance of
petitioners’ qualified offer completely resolved the issue of
petitioners’ liabilities for the 1989, 1991, and 1992 tax years.
Respondent asserts that petitioners are not now able to raise new
issues relating to their 1989, 1991, and 1992 liabilities.
Petitioners contend that petitioners’ qualified offer
included only items in dispute in the cases at the time the offer
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011