- 11 - application form was on file at that time and, by implication, was approved. Petitioners conclude that respondent cannot now deny the exemption. It appears that petitioners are suggesting an estoppel argument based on their reliance on the no-change decision in 1994. However, it is well established that each tax year stands on its own. See Rose v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 28, 32 (1970). Furthermore, errors of law in prior years do not estop the Commissioner from correcting those errors in later years. Auto. Club of Mich. v. Commissioner, 353 U.S. 180, 183 (1957). In view of the apparent failure of Mr. Vigil to file Form 4361 timely, acquiescence by agents of respondent in accepting his claim of exemption in 1994 was an error of law. Such a mistake does not prevent correction of the error as to 2001. Id. at 184. Section 1402(e) imposes time limitations, and the Commissioner’s agents have neither the authority nor the power to grant an exemption not complying with the statute. Robertson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-32, affd. without published opinion 742 F.2d 1446 (2d Cir. 1983). We conclude that Mr. Vigil is not exempt because he did not satisfy the requirements of section 1402(e)(1). Respondent’s determination that petitioners are liable for the tax imposed by section 1401 on Mr. Vigil’s 2001 self-employment income is sustained.Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 NextLast modified: March 27, 2008