Leon S. Malachinski - Page 16




                                       - 16 -                                         

          872-A.  Nor do the proffered statements indicate that Wynne or              
          anyone else forged petitioner’s name to that document, or even              
          that Wynne herself signed it.                                               
          II.  The Payment of $20,400 in 1984                                         
               In April of 1984, acting on professional advice, petitioner            
          sent to the IRS a remittance of $20,400 with respect to his and             
          Wynne’s anticipated joint Federal income tax liability for 1980.            
          Four years later, in April of 1988, the IRS transferred the                 
          $20,400 to petitioner’s individual 1982 Federal income tax                  
          account.  The IRS transcripts of account indicate that about 6              
          months thereafter, in October of 1988, the $20,400, plus $902 in            
          interest, was refunded.  This entry in the IRS records was made             
          6 years prior to respondent’s issuance of the notice of                     
          deficiency asserting that petitioner was liable for 1980 taxes of           
          $43,750.                                                                    
               Petitioner argues that he did not request either the                   
          crediting of the $20,400 to his 1982 taxable year or the refund             
          of that amount.  He denies that he ever received the refund;                
          instead, he speculates, Wynne intercepted the check and forged              
          it.  He concludes that, even if he does not prevail upon the                
          statute of limitations argument, he is entitled to credit for the           
          $20,400 against the deficiency he has agreed is owing for 1980 in           
          the absence of a statute of limitations defense.                            







Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011