§350
15 cases·2 followed·2 distinguished·11 cited—13% support
Statute Text — 26 U.S.C. §350
Statute text not available for this section.
15 Citing Cases
The holding in In re Emerson is readily distinguishable from the holdings in numerous cases that have held that a “termination” occurs at the point of confirmation.
350; see Allison v. Commissioner, 97 T.C. 544, 547-548 (1991); Neilson v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. at 9. Petitioner's 2009 deficiency was not adjudicated in the bankruptcy court. Respondent did not file a proofofclaim in petitioner's bankruptcy case, and there is no evidence ofan adjudication under 11 U.S.C. sec. 505(a)(1). Instead, petitioner co
s afforded petitionerthe option to contest the valuation of respondent's claim until its bankruptcy case was closed on March 3, 2005. Even after the bankruptcy court's final decree, petitioner was freely permitted to reopen the case. Bankruptcy Code sec. 350(b); Fed. R. Bankr. P. 5010. Nonetheless, petitioner chose not to pursue any ofthese avenues to contest respondent's proof ofclaim. We will not attempt a postbankruptcy final decree valuation ofrespondent's claim. Indeed, even bankruptcy cour