- 2 -
All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in
effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the
Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Background
On October 21, 1996, petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of
this Court by timely filing a petition. At the time he filed the
petition, petitioner resided in New Haven, Connecticut.
On December 23, 1996, respondent timely filed an answer to
the petition denying that respondent erred with respect to the
determinations set forth in the deficiency notice. Respondent's
answer includes specific allegations in support of the
determination that petitioner is liable for an addition to tax
for fraudulent failure to file for 1991 and for the fraud penalty
for 1992 and 1993.
Petitioner failed to file a reply denying the allegations
contained in respondent's answer. Thus, on March 20, 1997,
respondent filed a motion under Rule 37(c) to have the undenied
allegations of fact deemed admitted. By notice of filing dated
March 20, 1997, petitioner was notified of the filing of
respondent's Rule 37(c) motion. Petitioner failed to file a
reply to respondent's answer pursuant to the Court's notice of
filing. On April 17, 1997, we granted respondent's motion.
Respondent's answer reads, in pertinent part, as follows:
6. FURTHER ANSWERING the petition, and in support
of the respondent's determination that a part of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011