- 4 -
to have been committed by the Commissioner in the determination
of the deficiency or liability" and "Clear and concise lettered
statements of the facts on which petitioner bases the assignments
of error".
We agree with respondent that petitioner's petition, amended
petition, and second amended petition do not allege any
justiciable error with respect to respondent's determinations in
the notices of deficiency and allege no justiciable facts in
support of any error as required by Rule 34(b)(4) and (5).
Accordingly, decision will be entered for respondent.
We next consider respondent's motion for a penalty under
section 6673. Section 6673(a)(1) provides:
Whenever it appears to the Tax Court that--
(A) proceedings before it have been instituted or
maintained by the taxpayer primarily for delay,
(B) the taxpayer's position in such proceeding is
frivolous or groundless, or
(C) the taxpayer unreasonably failed to pursue
available administrative remedies,
the Tax Court, in its decision, may require the
taxpayer to pay to the United States a penalty not in
excess of $25,000.
Petitioner is no stranger to this Court or to the Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit. Walker v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1993-138, affd. per curiam in an unpublished opinion 19
F.3d 9 (2d Cir. 1994) (Walker I); Walker v. Commissioner, 52 F.3d
310 (2d Cir. 1995), affg. without a published opinion an
unpublished Order of this Court (Walker II). In Walker I, the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011