Johannes M. Schalekamp - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         

          1989 Federal income tax, a $178,587 accuracy-related penalty, and           
          a $2,956,005 fraud penalty.                                                 
               Respondent has conceded the fraud penalty.  The issues                 
          remaining for decision are:  (1) Whether the period of                      
          limitations on assessment and collection of petitioner’s income             
          tax liability for 1989 expired before respondent mailed the                 
          statutory notice of deficiency; (2) whether, under sections                 
          871(b)(1) and 897(a), petitioner was required to report amounts             
          received in 1989 from his disposition of installment notes that             
          he received in 1987 and 1988, and if so, in what amount;                    
          (3) whether respondent's determination of a deficiency is in part           
          arbitrary within the meaning of Helvering v. Taylor, 293 U.S. 507           
          (1935); and (4) whether petitioner is liable for a penalty under            
          section 6662(a) on account of negligence or disregard of rules or           
          regulations.  Unless indicated otherwise, all section references            
          are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year in issue,           
          and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice              
          and Procedure.                                                              
               Because we find for petitioner with respect to the period of           
          limitations, petitioner has successfully established an                     
          affirmative defense to respondent’s determinations of a                     
          deficiency and penalties, and we need not further address the               
          adjustments giving rise to respondent’s determination of a                  
          deficiency or the accuracy-related penalty.                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011