- 41 -
tax in this forum and require them to seek it in another. See
Estate of Baumgardner v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. at 446.
I do not believe that Congress intended, when enacting
section 6330, to expand this Court’s jurisdiction and at the same
time create a situation where choice of this forum would provide
such unfair results. See id. at 453. To narrowly interpret the
statute to prevent the Court from deciding an overpayment exists
frustrates our congressionally conferred jurisdiction.
As we noted in Estate of Baumgardner v. Commissioner,
supra at 457: “it is hard to imagine that Congress could have
intended to bifurcate an ‘overpayment’” and that “It is equally
hard to imagine that an ‘overpayment’ has a different meaning
depending upon the forum. Either of those approaches would force
some taxpayers to resolve a single tax controversy in two
different forums”, and this would duplicate costs for taxpayers.
The majority’s approach will force taxpayers to resolve a single
tax controversy in two different forums--assuming arguendo that
they were not so barred by the period of limitations, res
judicata, or prejudiced by having their claim being reduced or
eliminated by the look-back rules of section 6511(b).
I seek to find harmony in the statutory framework in order
to avoid acute injustice to taxpayers. “Considering the
overcrowded dockets in most Federal courts, we cannot be
insensitive to opportunities to avoid unnecessary litigation.”
Page: Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011