- 7 -
H. Respondent’s First Motion For Summary Judgment
On July 20, 2001, respondent filed a Motion For Summary
Judgment And To Impose A Penalty Under I.R.C. Section 6673.
Respondent’s motion was called for hearing in Las Vegas, Nevada,
on September 10, 2001. Petitioner appeared at the hearing and
informed the Court that she intended to file tax returns for the
years in issue. In response, counsel for respondent informed the
Court that if petitioner were in compliance and if she were to
concede the case, respondent would withdraw his request for the
imposition of a penalty under section 6673. Under the
circumstances, the Court denied respondent’s motion for summary
judgment in order to allow petitioner time to file her tax
returns.
I. Respondent’s Second Motion for Summary Judgment
Contrary to her representation to the Court, petitioner
failed to file tax returns for the years in issue or to work with
respondent’s counsel toward that end. As a result, on February
8, 2002, respondent filed a second Motion For Summary Judgment
And To Impose A Penalty Under I.R.C. Section 6673. It is this
motion that is before us at this time.
In his motion, respondent asserts that there is no dispute
as to a material fact and that respondent is entitled to judgment
as a matter of law. In particular, respondent contends that
because petitioner received the notices of deficiency dated May
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011