- 125 - & Lime, Inc. (Adjustment C) wherein the Respondent proposes to allow the Petitioners an additional deduction in 1990 in the amount of $798,490.00 and to disallow deductions in 1991 and 1992 in the amounts of $868,812.00 and $615,355.00, respectively. Subsequent to the Roses’ filing their petition with the Court, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Gitlitz v. Commissioner, 531 U.S. 206 (2001). In Gitlitz v. Commissioner, supra, the Supreme Court held that shareholders of an insolvent S corporation may increase their basis in their interest in the S corporation by their pro rata share of cancellation of indebtedness (COD) income to the S corporation. Id. at 212-216. Petitioners filed their trial memorandum with the Court on February 4, 2004. In their trial memorandum, petitioners made the following assertion: The Commissioner has failed to increase Mr. Rose’s basis in Zephyr to account for Rose’s proportionate share of excluded cancellation of indebtedness income arising from the Zephyr Bankruptcy. Mr. Rose’s basis should be increased by approximately $1,900,000 to reflect the amount of this Gitlitz adjustment. * * * In respondent’s trial memorandum, also filed with the Court on February 4, 2004, respondent claimed that the following issue was unresolved: “22. Whether petitioners have sufficient basis to deduct claimed flow-through losses from Zephyr Rock & Lime, Inc. in 1990, 1991, and 1992?” In their posttrial briefs dealing with basis issue, petitioners contended that the Supreme Court’s holding in Gitlitz v. Commissioner, supra, should allow the Roses to increase theirPage: Previous 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011