[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 26, Volume 11]
[Revised as of April 1, 2004]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 26CFR1.1311(b)-1]

[Page 629-630]
 
                       TITLE 26--INTERNAL REVENUE
 
    CHAPTER I--INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 
                               (CONTINUED)
 
PART 1_INCOME TAXES--Table of Contents
 
Sec. 1.1311(b)-1  Maintenance of an inconsistent position.

    (a) In general. Under the circumstances stated in Sec. 1.1312-1, 
Sec. 1.1312-2, paragraph (a) of Sec. 1.1312-3, Sec. 1.1312-5, Sec. 
1.1312-6, and Sec. 1.1312-7, the maintenance of an inconsistent 
position is a condition necessary for adjustment. The requirement in 
such circumstances is that a position maintained with respect to the 
taxable year of the determination and which is adopted in the 
determination be inconsistent with the erroneous inclusion, exclusion, 
omission, allowance, disallowance, recognition, or nonrecognition, as 
the case may be, with respect to the taxable year of the error. That is, 
a position successfully maintained with respect to the taxable year of 
the determination must be inconsistent with the treatment accorded an 
item which was the subject of an error in the computation of the tax for 
the closed taxable year. Adjustments under the circumstances stated in 
paragraph (b) of Sec. 1.1312-3 and in Sec. 1.1312-4 are made without 
regard to the maintenance of an inconsistent position.
    (b) Adjustments resulting in refund or credit. (1) An adjustment 
under any of the circumstances stated in Sec. 1.1312-1, Sec. 1.1312-5, 
Sec. 1.1312-6, or Sec. 1.1312-7 which would result in the allowance of 
a refund or credit is authorized only if (i) the Commissioner, in 
connection with a determination, has maintained a position which is 
inconsistent with the erroneous inclusion, omission, disallowance, 
recognition, or nonrecognition, as the case may be, in the year of the 
error, and (ii) such inconsistent position is adopted in the 
determination.

    Example: A taxpayer who keeps his books on the cash method 
erroneously included as income on his return for 1954 an item of accrued 
interest. After the period of limitations on refunds for 1954 had 
expired, the district director, on behalf of the Commissioner, proposed 
an adjustment for the year 1955 on the ground that the item of interest 
was received in 1955 and, therefore, was properly includible in gross 
income for that year. The taxpayer and the district director entered 
into an agreement which meets all of the requirements of Sec. 
1.1313(a)-4 and which determines that the interest item was includible 
in gross income for 1955. The Commissioner has maintained a position 
inconsistent with the inclusion of the interest item for 1954. As the 
determination (the agreement pursuant to Sec. 1.1313(a)-4) adopted such 
inconsistent position, an adjustment is authorized for the year 1954.

    (2) An adjustment under circumstances stated in Sec. 1.1312-1, 
Sec. 1.1312-5, Sec. 1.1312-6, or Sec. 1.1312-7 which would result in 
the allowance of a refund or credit is not authorized if the taxpayer 
with respect to whom the determination is made, and not the 
Commissioner, has maintained such inconsistent position.


[[Page 630]]


    Example: In the example in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph, 
assume that the Commissioner asserted a deficiency for 1955 based upon 
other items for that year but, in computing the net income upon which 
such deficiency was based, did not include the item of interest. The 
taxpayer appealed to the Tax Court and in his petition asserted that the 
interest item should be included in gross income for 1955. The Tax Court 
in 1960 included the item of interest in its redetermination of tax for 
the year 1955. In such case no adjustment would be authorized for 1954 
as the taxpayer, and not the Commissioner, maintained a position 
inconsistent with the erroneous inclusion of the item of interest in the 
gross income of the taxpayer for that year.

    (c) Adjustments resulting in additional assessments. (1) An 
adjustment under any of the circumstances stated in Sec. 1.1312-2, 
paragraph (a) of Sec. 1.1312-3, Sec. 1.1312-5, Sec. 1.1312-6, or 
Sec. 1.1312-7 which would result in an additional assessment is 
authorized only if (i) the taxpayer with respect to whom the 
determination is made has, in connection therewith, maintained a 
position which is inconsistent with the erroneous exclusion, omission, 
allowance, recognition, or nonrecognition, as the case may be, in the 
year of the error, and (ii) such inconsistent position is adopted in the 
determination.

    Example: A taxpayer in his return for 1950 claimed and was allowed a 
deduction for a loss arising from a casualty. After the taxpayer had 
filed his return for 1951 and after the period of limitations upon the 
assessment of a deficiency for 1950 had expired, it was discovered that 
the loss actually occurred in 1951. The taxpayer, therefore, filed a 
claim for refund for the year 1951 based upon the allowance of a 
deduction for the loss in that year, and the claim was allowed by the 
Commissioner in 1955. The taxpayer thus has maintained a position 
inconsistent with the allowance of the deduction for 1950 by filing a 
claim for refund for 1951 based upon the same deduction. As the 
determination (the allowance of the claim for refund) adopts such 
inconsistent position, an adjustment is authorized for the year 1950.

    (2) An adjustment under the circumstances stated in Sec. 1.1312-2, 
paragraph (a) of Sec. 1.1312-3, Sec. 1.1312-5, Sec. 1.1312-6, or 
Sec. 1.1312-7 which would result in an additional assessment is not 
authorized if the Commissioner, and not the taxpayer, has maintained 
such inconsistent position.

    Example: In the example in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph, 
assume that the taxpayer did not file a claim for refund for 1951 but 
the Commissioner issued a notice of deficiency for 1951 based upon other 
items. The taxpayer filed a petition with the Tax Court of the United 
States and the Commissioner in his answer voluntarily proposed the 
allowance for 1951 of a deduction for the loss previously allowed for 
1950. The Tax Court took the deduction into account in its 
redetermination in 1955 of the tax for the year 1951. In such case no 
adjustment would be authorized for the year 1950 as the Commissioner, 
and not the taxpayer, has maintained a position inconsistent with the 
allowance of a deduction for the loss in that year.

[T.D. 6500, 25 FR 12032, Nov. 26, 1960, as amended by T.D. 6617, 27 FR 
10823, Nov. 7, 1962]