- 40 -
was issued on December 19, 1997. As discussed above, petitioner
failed to sign his tax returns and filed no valid returns for the
1987, 1988, or 1989 tax years. In addition, we have found fraud
for portions of the 1987 and 1988 deficiencies and all of the
1989 deficiency. Therefore, under section 6501(c)(1) and (3),
respondent was not barred by the statute of limitations from
issuing the notices of deficiency with respect to those years.
With respect to the 1990 tax year, petitioner’s underpayments for
that year were fraudulent, to the extent determined above.
Accordingly, respondent was not barred by the statute of
limitations with respect to the 1990 tax year under section
6501(c)(1).
Double Jeopardy, Res Judicata, and Collateral Estoppel
In his pleadings, petitioner argues that the determinations
for each year are barred by double jeopardy, res judicata, and
collateral estoppel. We find petitioner’s arguments to be wholly
without merit. Petitioner’s acquittal on a criminal section
7206(1) charge does not preclude, under the doctrines of double
jeopardy, res judicata, or collateral estoppel, respondent from
litigating petitioner’s civil liability for a deficiency in tax
and additions to tax for failure to file, negligence, and fraud
with respect to the same tax years.
There is a higher standard of proof in criminal proceedings
(beyond a reasonable doubt) than there is in the civil proceeding
Page: Previous 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011