- 4 - income within the United States. Predictably, respondent did not consider nor accept petitioner's filings for 1994 and 1995 as income tax returns. For 1996, petitioner did not file anything with respondent with respect to her income tax for that year. The notice of deficiency followed in due course.3 In her petition with this Court, petitioner's sole allegation is that "Taxes were timely filed with Philadelphia IRS as I was instructed by IRS to do. IRS should go by tax forms that they originally accepted." After the petition was filed and the case was assigned to one of respondent's Appeals officers, petitioner submitted unsigned Forms 1040 for the years 1994 and 1996, in which some of petitioner's income was listed. The 1994 Form 1040 showed an overpayment of $502, and the 1996 Form 1040 showed a tax due of $1,091.4 The only apparent effects of the unsigned returns submitted were respondent's concessions regarding petitioner's filing status and her entitlement to itemized deductions for 2 of the years at issue. See supra note 2. Prior to trial, petitioner filed a Motion For Summary 3 The income adjustments in the notice of deficiency are based on information returns filed by payers, some of which were not included on the statements and declarations petitioner filed with respondent. 4 In respondent's trial memorandum, as well as in a posttrial memorandum, respondent refers to petitioner's submission of an unsigned Form 1040 for the year 1995. Although the unsigned Forms 1040 for the years 1994 and 1996 were offered into evidence, no such Form 1040 was offered into evidence for 1995.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011