- 5 - Circuit, to which this case is appealable, sustained a default judgment, including additions to tax for fraud, against a taxpayer who failed to appear for trial. In this case, as appears from the procedural history set forth below in relation to respondent's motion for a penalty under section 6673, there is every reason to believe that petitioner's default was willful and was a continuation of his history of willful and flagrant disregard of his tax liabilities. At no time during this proceeding has he offered evidence of any reasonable dispute with respect to the facts alleged and relied on by respondent. Respondent's specific allegations, generally supported by the evidence deemed stipulated, set forth sufficient facts for respondent to carry his burden of proof. Failure to file returns, failure to report income over a period of years, failure to pay tax over a period of years, and concealment of assets are common badges of fraud. See, e.g., Bradford v. Commissioner, 796 F.2d 303, 307-308 (9th Cir. 1986), affg. T.C. Memo. 1984-601. Under these circumstances, respondent's burden of proof is satisfied. See Smith v. Commissioner, supra. Respondent's motion for default judgment should be granted, and the deficiencies and additions to tax determined by respondent should be sustained in full.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011