Stephen C. Smith - Page 3




                                        - 3 -                                         
          Construction, a carpentry, remodeling, and home repair business.            
          Terminex International Co., LP (Terminex), paid $51,132 in 1994,            
          $104,915 in 1995, and $114,647 in 1996 to King of Construction              
          for repairing homes that had been damaged by termites.  King of             
          Construction had no employees during those years.  Petitioner did           
          the work and sometimes hired contract labor.  Petitioner bought             
          materials, acquired equipment, and hired contract labor as                  
          needed.  He issued some Forms 1099 to subcontractors.  He                   
          retained the profits that were left after paying expenses for               
          King of Construction.                                                       
               Petitioner did not file a Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income            
          Tax Return, or pay income tax or estimated tax for 1994, 1995, or           
          1996.  Respondent began the audit of this case before May 13,               
          1998, and issued a notice of deficiency to petitioner for 1994,             
          1995, and 1996 on September 1, 1998.                                        
               Petitioner alleged in his petition that his income is not              
          taxable, and that the following defenses apply:  (1) Res                    
          judicata, (2) estoppel, (3) waiver, (4) duress, (5) fraud, (6)              
          statute of limitations, (7) invalid notice of deficiency, (8)               
          failure to provide Freedom of Information Act documents and                 
          materials necessary for petitioner to prepare for trial, (9)                
          failure of respondent to exhaust administrative remedies, (10)              
          laches, (11) the “clean hands” doctrine, and (12) illegality of             
          the notice of deficiency.  He alleged no facts to support these             






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011