- 3 -
filed the amended petition, petitioner resided in Vancouver,
British Columbia, Canada.
In the petitions, petitioner averred, among other things,
that “The Self-assessment form (1040) on file for the year 1997
for Account #500-76-8786 was submitted in error by Petitioner,”
“The amount of compensation received by this Petitioner was not
‘gross income’ within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code,”
“this Petitioner received compensation for her labors errantly
listed on her employer’s 1099, which has never been defined as
income in the IRC,” “The lawful-authority of assessing an
ACCURACY RELATED PENALTY is in question,” “Petitioner’s amount of
self-assessed taxes were not from gross income as defined within
the meaning of the IRC,” and “Petitioner disagrees with the
Authority of the IRS and the lawfulness of filing requirements.”
On October 4, 2000, this case was called from the calendar
for the motions session of the Court at Washington, D.C.
Petitioner failed to appear at the hearing. The Court noted that
we had received “a slew” of documents from petitioner. These
documents, however, contained various defects and were returned
to petitioner unfiled. The Court received into the record a Form
1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, that respondent had
accepted as petitioner’s Federal income tax return for 1997. At
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011