33
Rule 1(a) directs Judges of this Court to prescribe an
appropriate procedure in matters involving questions of practice
and procedure for which there is no applicable rule of procedure.
Ash v. Commissioner, 96 T.C. 459, 469-470 (1991). Under
appropriate circumstances, we may impose sanctions that are
designed to mitigate the effects of misconduct by one party. See
Rules 104(c), 123; Betz v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 816, 823-824
(1988) (as a sanction for the Commissioner's failure to timely
file an answer, we deemed established that the Commissioner erred
in determining that additional interest was due under section
6621(c)); Vermouth v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1488, 1499 (1987)
(Commissioner not permitted to introduce evidence of fraud
because of failure to timely file an answer); see also Chambers
v. NASCO, 501 U.S. 32 (1991) (District Court properly invoked its
inherent power in assessing as a sanction for the plaintiff's bad
faith conduct the attorney's fees and related expenses paid by
the defendant).
Petitioner contends that respondent changed the 30-day
letter to match it to the 3 years in the notice of deficiency and
submitted it to support respondent's position that the notice of
deficiency described the basis for the tax due as required by
section 7522. Whether or not the agent had that purpose, the
change did not have that effect because respondent conceded that
the contents of the 30-day letter have no bearing on whether the
notice of deficiency described the basis for the tax due as
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011