- 12 - Buford addressed the admissibility into evidence of the IMF transcripts involved in those cases. We have considered peti- tioner’s renewed objection to the admissibility into evidence of the IRS transcripts, and we decline to change our ruling at trial with respect to those transcripts.8 With respect to the admissibility into evidence of respec- tive Forms 4340 with respect to petitioner’s taxable years 1992 and 1995, respondent offered those forms into evidence at trial, petitioner had no objection to them, and the Court admitted them into evidence and made them part of the record in this case. On brief, petitioner objects for the first time to the admissibility into evidence of respective Forms 4340 with respect to peti- tioner’s taxable years 1992 and 1995. By failing to make a timely objection at trial, petitioner has waived her objection to the admissibility into evidence of those forms.9 8We note that, even though the IRS transcripts are part of the instant record, we have not relied on those transcripts in reaching our findings and conclusions herein. 9Assuming arguendo that petitioner had not waived her claimed evidentiary objection to respective Forms 4340 with respect to petitioner’s taxable years 1992 and 1995, we would nonetheless overrule that objection. In support of her position that Forms 4340 in question are not admissible into evidence, petitioner asserts on brief in pertinent part: They [Forms 4340 in question] were generated after the hearing date. The fact that the hearing itself didn’t take place is irrelevant to the consideration. It is clear that the statute places the burden on the Respon- dent to establish “at the hearing” compliance with the (continued...)Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011