- 9 -
282 U.S. 270, 276 (1931); Piarulle v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. 1035,
1042 (1983). Petitioners do not disagree with respondent
concerning these holdings but urge this Court to step outside of
the holdings of Stange and Piarulle. Petitioners argue that the
September 1981 version of Form 872-A signed by the Greenfields,
unlike the written agreement considered in Stange and the Form
872, Consent to Extend the Time to Assess Tax, considered in
Piarulle, also operates to extend the period of limitations on
refunds. Petitioners argue that this refund extension creates a
mutuality that transforms Form 872-A from a unilateral waiver
into an executory contract.
We decline petitioners’ invitation to hold differently here
than in Stange and Piarulle. We are unpersuaded that the refund
language in the September 1981 version of Form 872-A effects a
fundamental change in the document, somehow transforming Form
872-A from a waiver into an executory contract. This Court has
held consistently that, although interpretations of Forms 872-A
are informed by contract principles, Form 872-A is a unilateral
waiver of a defense and not a contract. See Piarulle v.
Commissioner, supra at 1042; see also Bilski v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 1994-55, affd. 69 F.3d 64 (5th Cir. 1995). In Bilski,
which petitioners urge was decided wrongly, the facts were
similar to the facts here. In 1986, the Bilskis executed a Form
872-A. They filed for bankruptcy under chapter 7 in June 1988
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008