- 9 -
the dependency exemption and child tax credit claimed by
petitioners for the taxable year 2003.5
C. Estoppel
Petitioners further argue that respondent’s past acceptance
of Federal income tax returns that did not conform to the written
declaration requirement estops the disallowance of the dependency
exemption and child tax credit for the taxable year 2003. To
raise estoppel as an affirmative defense a party must
specifically assert it in his or her pleading. Rule 39; Lodi
Iron Works, Inc. v. Commissioner, 29 T.C. 696, 701 (1958).
Although no technical form is required to assert a matter in a
pleading, it must be simple, precise, and direct, so that it
gives the opposing party and the Court fair notice that the
matter is in controversy. Rule 31(a) and (b). Petitioners’
amended petition adheres to these requirements.
Petitioners claim that respondent’s failure to challenge the
dependency exemption on Mr. Chamberlain’s individual and joint
Federal income tax returns for the taxable years 1996 through
2002, despite Mr. Chamberlain’s failure to comply with the
written declaration requirement, should prevent respondent from
now demanding that a Form 8332 accompany their 2003 joint return.
In the alternative, petitioners claim that respondent’s failure
5We do not address here the question of whether Mrs.
Norris’s notarized letter would fulfill the requirements of Form
8332 if petitioners had had the opportunity to attach it to their
2003 joint return.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007