- 31 - and 9 explain why adjustments were made with respect to petitioner's tax liability for 1991, and how respondent calculated the deficiency at issue. We agree with respondent. A trial before the Tax Court is a proceeding de novo. Greenberg's Express, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 328. Our decision in this case must be based on the record of the case, not the record developed at the administrative level. See O'Dwyer v. Commissioner, 28 T.C. 698, 702-704 (1957), affd. 266 F.2d 575, 581 (4th Cir. 1959). Inasmuch as petitioner has not shown that respondent's deficiency determination was arbitrary and erroneous, or that the determination was not supported by the proper foundation evidence, see Weimerskirch v. Commissioner, 596 F.2d 358, 362 (9th Cir. 1979) revg. 67 T.C. 672 (1977), it is inappropriate for us to look behind the deficiency notice to examine the basis for respondent's determination. Issue (c). Exhibit 10, IRS Settlement Proposal Respondent objects to the admission of an offer in settlement sent by an IRS Appeals officer to petitioner. Rule 408 of the Federal Rules of Evidence renders inadmissible any evidence of conduct or statements made in negotiations to compromise a claim. Petitioner relies on the third sentence of Rule 408, which provides that the rule does not require "the exclusion of any evidence otherwise discoverable merely because it is presented in the course of compromise negotiations." TherePage: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011