Steven H. Toushin - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         
          The case is before the Court on petitioner's motion for partial             
          summary judgment filed March 10, 1995, pursuant to Rule 121.                
               Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner's Federal             
          income tax and additions to tax as follows:                                 
                Additions to Tax                                                      
               Year      Deficiency     Sec. 6653(b)        Sec. 6661                 
               1980      $25,265        $16,983             --                        
               1981      34,220         25,018              --                        
               1982      21,196         10,598              $5,299                    
               The statutory notice in this case was issued on July 1,                
          1992.  Petitioner's motion is directed only to the deficiency and           
          additions to tax determined under the notice for the year 1982.             
          The "normal" 3-year statute of limitations under section 6501(a)            
          has expired for taxable year 1982.  Based upon the allegations in           
          respondent's amended answer, the deficiency and additions to tax            
          determined by respondent for the year 1982 may only be assessed             
          if the "fraud" exception of section 6501(c)(1) applies.  In his             
          motion, petitioner alleges that based upon the affidavits                   
          submitted, the facts stipulated by the parties, and the pleadings           
          and attachments thereto, respondent as a matter of law cannot               
          meet her burden of proving fraud, and the Court must enter                  
          summary judgment in favor of petitioner for the year 1982.                  
               For the reasons set out below, we find that there is a                 
          genuine issue of material fact as to whether there is an                    
          understatement of tax due to fraud with respect to petitioner's             
          tax return for the year 1982.                                               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011