- 7 -
Petitioner has never been notified of a duty to
file, or that any requirement was placed upon the
Petitioner to file, nor was Petitioner ever served with
any notice by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue
requiring Petitioner to keep records or file a tax
return or statement; * * *
* * * * * * *
Petitioner's Official Records (IMF, not to exclude
other systems of records), created and maintained
solely by the Internal Revenue Service, reflects the
Internal Revenue Service fraud upon Petitioner.
Petitioner's Two Motions
On December 29, 1995, petitioner filed his first motion,
namely, the Motion To Shift Burden Of Proof To Respondent. This
motion is premised on petitioner's argument that respondent's
deficiency determinations were not based on any factual evidence.
On January 11, 1996, petitioner filed his second motion,
namely, the Motion To "Quash The Going Forward With The
Evidence". Such motion closely tracks petitioner's first motion
but also alleges various violations of petitioner's
Constitutional rights.
The Hearing on the Parties' Motions
Respondent's motion to dismiss and petitioner's two motions
were called for hearing in Washington, D.C., on February 14,
1996, and again on March 6, 1996. Counsel for respondent
appeared at the hearings and presented argument and adduced
evidence in respect of the pending motions. Petitioner did not
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011