- 2 -
Donald F. Wood and Benjamin M. Leff, for petitioner.
Richard T. Cummings and Michael W. Bentley, for respondent.
OPINION
GOEKE, Judge: Petitioner has filed a motion under Rule 2611
seeking a redetermination of overpayment interest. The issue is
the appropriate rate of interest on petitioner’s overpayment.
The underlying facts of this case are set out in detail in
Garwood Irrigation Co. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-195, and
are incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioner is
entitled to recover with interest an overpayment of tax on its
built-in gain for the taxable year ending December 31, 1999,
pursuant to our Memorandum Opinion. Petitioner elected status as
an S corporation effective January 1, 1997, and remains such.
In determining the interest due petitioner relative to that
overpayment, respondent applied the reduced interest rate
provided in the flush language of section 6621(a)(1). Petitioner
disputes this computation in a timely filed motion under Rule
261. Petitioner seeks the higher interest paid to noncorporate
taxpayers under section 6621(a)(1)(A) and (B) rather than the
lower rates for corporations provided in the parenthetical
language of subparagraph (B) and the flush language of section
1Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and
Procedure. Section references are to the Internal Revenue Code.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011