- 8 - immaterial in this case. Moreover, petitioner had been placed on notice, by the holding in his previous case, that such evidence and the arguments in connection therewith possessed no merit. The voluminous documents petitioner presented to this Court had no relevance to his case. When that is coupled with his nonsensical arguments, the Court is provoked to apply the penalty under section 6673(a)(1). The fact that petitioner believed, or may have believed, that he was entitled to a larger home interest deduction for 1991 than the amount allowed by respondent is of no consequence in this matter. In Sloan v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 137, 148 (1994), affd. 53 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. 1995), this Court observed that "The mere fact that not every one of petitioner's arguments is frivolous or groundless does not eliminate the applicability of section 6673." See also Granado v. Commissioner, 792 F.2d 91, 94 (7th Cir. 1986), affg. T.C. Memo. 1985-237. Petitioner's possible belief with regard to his home interest deduction does not shield him from the imposition of the penalty under section 6673(a)(1). By far, the majority of petitioner's pleadings and arguments are frivolous and demonstrate that petitioner regarded this case as a vehicle to protest the tax laws of this country and espouse his own misguided views. This Court does not look with favor upon such tactics.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011