Otelio S. Randall - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         
               The sole issue remaining for decision is whether petitioner            
          is liable for the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1) for              
          each of the years at issue.  We hold that he is.                            
                                  FINDINGS OF FACT                                    
               Some of the facts were established for purposes of this case           
          pursuant to this Court's Order under Rule 91(f) dated September             
          18, 1996.2                                                                  
               Petitioner, who at all relevant times was a cardiologist               
          employed by Howard University and Howard University Hospital in             
          Washington, D.C., resided in Washington, D.C., at the time the              
          petition was filed.                                                         
               Sometime during the spring of 1992, petitioner met Richard             
          Paul Todar (Mr. Todar), a certified public accountant, and asked            
          him to prepare his U.S. individual income tax return (return) for           
          1991.  At the time they met, petitioner and Mr. Todar both had a            
          financial interest in a small emergency health clinic (clinic)              
          located in Houston, Texas.  With the assistance of Mr. Todar,               
          petitioner requested and was granted an extension of time until             
          August 15, 1992, within which to file his 1991 return.                      
               Sometime after April 15, 1992, petitioner provided some                
          records to Mr. Todar with respect to Mr. Todar's preparation of             


          2  Facts virtually identical to those deemed established under              
          Rule 91(f) were set forth in a request for admissions filed by              
          respondent on July 9, 1996.  Each matter set forth in that                  
          request is deemed admitted because petitioner did not file a                
          response thereto.  See Rule 90(c).                                          




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

Last modified: May 25, 2011