- 5 - addresses the relevant issues as designated in the parties' Trial Memorandums and in particular as set forth by William T. Conklin, Pages 19-34 of Exhibit 7-J. At the calendar call, the Court gave petitioner copies of opinions in four cases to read before trial, which was set for the afternoon of the same day, to "demonstrate to you the error of your ways * * * that the position that you are taking as set forth in your trial memorandum is not going to prevail".1 The Court suggested that, rather than pursuing frivolous arguments, petitioner should attempt to present evidence of deductible expenses that might reduce the deficiencies and additions. When the case was recalled in the afternoon, respondent's counsel reported that a basis of settlement had not been reached and handed up a bare-bones stipulation of facts. Petitioner had refused to stipulate that he had not filed Federal income tax returns for the years in question or the amounts of compensation he had received. Petitioner's refusal to stipulate led to a trial on these issues, with the introduction of documentary evidence to support respondent's determinations that petitioner had not filed income tax returns and the testimony of four witnesses (petitioner's two employers and their respective 1 Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68 (7th Cir. 1986); Ghalardi Income Tax Educ. Found. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-460; Liddane v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-259; Talmage v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-114, affd. without published opinion 101 F.3d 695 (4th Cir. 1996).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011