Transport Labor Contract/Leasing, Inc. & Subsidiaries - Page 80

                                       - 80 -                                         
          6211(a), the amount of a deficiency for a taxable year is                   
          increased by the amount of any rebates for such taxable year.               
               In an amendment to answer, respondent asserted increased               
          deficiencies in tax for petitioner’s taxable years 1994, 1995,              
          and 1996 on the ground that petitioner was not entitled to                  
          petitioner’s tentative refunds.  The Court stated in Transp.                
          Labor Contract/Leasing, Inc. & Subs. v. Commissioner, 123 T.C. at           
          155 n.2:                                                                    
                    Our resolution of the issue remaining for decision                
               will resolve the issues that respondent raised in the                  
               amendment to answer relating to the disallowance of an                 
               NOL carryback that petitioner claimed from its taxable                 
               year 1997.                                                             
               Having held in Transport Labor I that the section 274(n)(1)            
          limitation applied to the per diem amounts that TLC paid to its             
          driver-employees, it was necessary, in order to calculate the               
          correct amounts of the deficiencies for petitioner’s taxable                
          years 1994, 1995, and 1996, respectively, to add the amount of              
          the tentative refund for each such taxable year to the amount of            
          the deficiency that respondent had determined in the notice for             
          each such year.  Sec. 6211(a) and (b).  That was the computation            
          to which the Court understood the parties to be referring in the            
          parties’ stipulation of facts.  That computation, which the Court           
          made, was a straightforward calculation under section 6211(a) and           









Page:  Previous  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  78  79  80  81  82  83  84  85  86  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011