- 13 -
"the burden of going forward to establish the deficiency based
upon evidence acquired independent of the grand jury."
Respondent obtained a continuance, and thereafter, the Court
granted the parties' joint motion to submit the issues in
petitioners' motion as fully stipulated under Rule 122.
Respondent filed the other motion now before us, seeking
leave to file an amendment to the answer to the amended petition.
Respondent's motion refers to a statement by petitioners' counsel
during a telephone conference call with this Court April 30. In
that statement petitioners' counsel allegedly indicated that the
$2.8 million of unreported income which petitioner admitted in
the allocution in his criminal case was not the same unreported
income which is set forth in the notice of deficiency for
petitioners' taxable year 1986. Although respondent's response
to Revised Interrogatory No. 40 had indicated a belief that the
$2.8 million was included in the notice of deficiency,
respondent's proposed amendment now seeks to assert that
petitioners owe taxes on that additional $2.8 million of
unreported income to which petitioner admitted in his allocution.
Respondent's amendment also seeks additional penalties for fraud.
Discussion
Petitioners' Motion To Suppress
With certain exceptions, rule 6(e) prohibits Government
attorneys from disclosing "matters occurring before the grand
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011