-5-
Petitioner’s case was heard on November 1, 1994. It was held
in suspense pending a decision by the Supreme Court regarding the
Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' opinion in Lundy v. Commissioner,
45 F.3d 856 (4th Cir. 1995).3 The Supreme Court handed down a
decision in the Lundy case on January 17, 1996. See Commissioner
v. Lundy, 516 U.S. , 116 S. Ct. 647 (1996).
Following a January 30, 1996, conference call with the
parties, we ordered that the record be “reopened for the limited
purpose of allowing petitioner to file a second amended petition on
or before February 29, 1996.” On February 27, 1996, petitioner
filed a second amended petition, disputing the deficiencies and
additions to tax, requesting refunds for overpayments of $2,096 and
$2,135 for 1989 and 1990, respectively, and contending that his
1989 and 1990 returns were timely filed. Petitioner further
asserted that he had understood the notices to address solely his
disallowed deductions rather than contesting the timely filing of
his returns as well. On March 28, 1996, respondent filed an answer
to petitioner’s second amended petition, denying petitioner’s
allegations, and asserting that this Court lacks jurisdiction to
award petitioner’s requested refunds for 1989 and 1990.
3 An appeal of this case would be to the Fourth Circuit
Court of Appeals.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011