- 21 - Moreover, by the time the returns were filed, the fraudulent acts and omissions had already occurred. In assessing petitioner's offer of proof, we have considered the testimony of Lipton and Timbie given in June 1994 in relation to Ms. Barth's innocent spouse claim. Petitioner was present and objected to questions to Timbie concerning the records that he had examined. After those objections were overruled, Timbie testified that he worked primarily from schedules prepared by Lipton and Onofrio and recommended the statements attached to the tax returns with respect to alleged loans. Timbie did not see any loan documents. Although Onofrio testified during criminal proceedings against petitioner, and petitioner was advised on April 4, 1995, to submit Onofrio's prior testimony as part of his offer of proof, petitioner failed to do so. The record is replete with clear and convincing evidence that petitioner underpaid his tax in each of the years in issue, and those underpayments are due to fraud. On consideration of the entire record, Respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution will be granted, and decision will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Last modified: May 25, 2011