Dale I. Dirkes - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
          material fact, and factual inferences will be made in a manner              
          most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment.  See                 
          Dahlstrom v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 812, 821 (1985).                         
               As previously discussed, the issues framed by the pleadings            
          in this case are:  (1) Whether petitioner failed to report                  
          capital gain of $137,835; (2) whether petitioner failed to report           
          interest income of $13; (3) whether petitioner should have                  
          reported as income a $227 State tax refund; (4) whether                     
          petitioner failed to report wages of $103,582; (5) whether                  
          petitioner is liable for an addition to tax pursuant to section             
          6651(a)(1) of $13,143; and (6) whether petitioner is liable for             
          an addition to tax pursuant to section 6654(a) of $2,115.63.                
               As we have stated, supra, respondent for the purpose of his            
          motion, concedes the capital gain adjustment of $137,835.                   
               Petitioner admits having received interest income of $13               
          (petition par. 5.A.).                                                       
               Petitioner admits having received a (state) tax refund of              
          $227 (petition par. 5.A.).                                                  
               Petitioner admits having received wages of $103,636.86                 
          (petition par. 5.A.).3                                                      




          3         Included in petitioner’s income figure of $103,636.86             
          is $54 for sports officiating.  The $54 is not included in                  
          respondent’s “wages” adjustment of $103,582, and respondent does            
          not assert a claim for the amount.                                          





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011