Maurice H. Sochia and Beatrice M. Sochia - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         

          purposes:  (1) There must be sufficient data to calculate the tax           
          liability, (2) the document must purport to be a return, (3)                
          there must be an honest and reasonable attempt to satisfy the               
          requirements of the tax law, and (4) the taxpayer must execute              
          the return under penalty of perjury.  Badaracco v. Commissioner,            
          464 U.S. 386 (1984); Beard v. Commissioner, supra at 777-778;               
          see also Zellerbach Paper Co. v. Helvering, 293 U.S. 172 (1934);            
          Florsheim Bros. Drygoods Co. v. United States, 280 U.S. 453                 
          (1930); National Contracting Co. v. Commissioner, 105 F.2d 488              
          (8th Cir. 1939), affg. 37 B.T.A. 689 (1938).  On their bogus form           
          petitioners created false "adjustments to income", subtracting              
          each item of "gross receipts" they had listed, to arrive at a net           
          income of zero.  Moreover, petitioners altered the jurat                    
          significantly.  A jurat is required to be made according to the             
          forms prescribed by the Secretary.  Sloan v. Commissioner, 102              
          T.C. 137, 146-147 (1994), affd. 53 F.3d 799 (7th Cir. 1995).                
               In light of the above, we conclude that none of the                    
          documents filed by petitioners for the years in issue demonstrate           
          an honest endeavor to satisfy the law.  We hold that petitioners            
          did not file Federal income tax returns for the years in issue.             
               Petitioners' arguments concerning the conflict between                 
          section 61(a) and the 16th Amendment are not well taken.  The               
          Supreme Court has defined "income" as "undeniable accessions to             
          wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have                 





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011