Richard John Kadunc - Page 7

                                                - 7 -                                                 

            challenge the merits of respondent's determinations with regard                           
            to the State income tax refund, petitioner chose to repeatedly                            
            and pointlessly advance bizarre and intricate mathematical                                
            theories to support his contention that State income tax refunds                          
            should not be taxable income.                                                             
                  Furthermore, and most notably, petitioner is no stranger to                         
            this Court.  In 1986, petitioner failed to include as income a                            
            State income tax refund he received for overpayment of his 1985                           
            State income taxes that he had deducted on his 1985 Federal                               
            income tax return.  In Kadunc v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-                           
            61, this Court held that the State income tax refund constituted                          
            gross income in the year received and should have been reported                           
            on petitioner's Federal income tax return for the year in which                           
            the refund was received.  The reasons for holding against                                 
            petitioner in that case were very well articulated by the Court.                          
            Yet, petitioner persisted in failing to report such income on his                         
            1991 return and chose to litigate that same issue again in this                           
            proceeding.6  Petitioner endeavored to introduce as evidence in                           
            this case documents and other evidence, including the trial                               
            transcript, from his prior case before this Court.  Such evidence                         
            did not sustain his cause in the previous case and is clearly                             

            6     Also, petitioner filed a petition with this Court, docket                           
            No. 10165-95, regarding this same issue for a different tax year.                         
            That petition was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction for the                              
            reason that the petition was untimely filed.  Petitioner has                              
            appealed the dismissal.                                                                   

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011