- 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