- 11 -
not believe, as stated to Respondent in writing
back in 1983, that the Consent encompassed
adjustments which had to be made through B.D.B.
Mr. Brody's affidavit on which petitioners rely states that
he considered the consent with his attorneys and:
We did not believe that the execution of the
document could result in the imposition of a
tax against me because the form did not include
B.D.B., and I was not a partner in Thunderbird.
* * * * * * *
My attorneys and I addressed this fact [i.e.,
that petitioner was not a partner in Thunderbird]
at that time, and it was our belief that the
failure to include B.D.B. in the waiver was a
fatal defect.
Petitioners also assert that the Court misconstrued
respondent's intent. They argue that the Court erroneously
"went beyond the written terms of the consent * * * [and]
considered the intent of the Service, an intent which is
not in evidence." Petitioners argue that "there is
absolutely no evidence as to what concerned the
Respondent." Petitioners also argue, based upon the
"new and additional information" attached to their cross-
motion for summary judgment, that respondent's agent simply
"presumed that Mr. Brody was a partner in Thunderbird".
As we understand it, petitioners' argument is that the
Commissioner's agent who prepared the consent on behalf of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011