- 12 -
See also sec. 7442; Paxman v. Commissioner, 50 T.C. 567, 576-577
(1968) (the Tax Court is not a court of equity; “The power to
legislate is exclusively the power of Congress and not of this
Court or any other court.”), affd. 414 F.2d 265 (10th Cir. 1969);
Lorain Ave. Clinic v. Commissioner, 31 T.C. 141, 164 (1958)
(“this Court does not have the powers of a court of equity * * *;
it has only the powers which have been expressly conferred by the
Congress.”).
Absent some constitutional defect, we are constrained to
apply the law as written, see Estate of Cowser v. Commissioner,
736 F.2d 1168, 1171-1174 (7th Cir. 1984), affg. 80 T.C. 783
(1983), and we may not rewrite the law because we may “deem its
effects susceptible of improvement”, see Commissioner v. Lundy,
516 U.S. 235, 252 (1996) (quoting Badaracco v. Commissioner, 464
U.S. 386, 398 (1984)). Accordingly, petitioners’ appeal for
relief must, in this instance, be addressed to their elected
representatives. “The proper place for a consideration of
petitioner’s complaint is the halls of Congress, not here.” Hays
Corp. v. Commissioner, 40 T.C. 436, 443 (1963), affd. 331 F.2d
422 (7th Cir. 1964).
Conclusion
Petitioners impress us as conscientious taxpayers who take
their tax responsibilities seriously and follow the rules.
Unfortunately for them, we are constrained by the law, as
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011