- 2 -
9999-00), respondent’s motion to hold petitioner in default in
the case at docket No. 10000-00 (respondent’s motion in the case
at docket No. 10000-00), respondent’s motion to dismiss for lack
of prosecution and to impose sanctions under section 66732 in the
case at docket No. 10001-00 (respondent’s motion in the case at
docket No. 10001-00), and respondent’s motion to dismiss for lack
of prosecution and to impose sanctions under section 6673 in the
case at docket No. 10002-00 (respondent’s motion in the case at
docket No. 10002-00). (We shall refer collectively to those four
motions as respondent’s motions.) At the request of respondent,
on October 15, 2001, the Court held a trial in order to enable
respondent to present evidence to satisfy the burden of produc-
tion under section 7491(c) that respondent maintains respondent
has with respect to: (1) The accuracy-related penalty under
section 6662(a) that respondent determined for each of the
taxable years 1996 and 1997 in the notice of deficiency (notice)
issued to Herbst Asset Management Trust (Herbst Management
Trust)3 in the case at docket No. 9999-00; (2) the addition to
tax under section 6651(a)(1) for each of the taxable years 1996
2All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code
(Code) in effect at all relevant times. All Rule references are
to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
3When referring in this Opinion to Herbst Asset Management
Trust and Herbst Management Trust, our use of the word “Trust”
and any similar words is for convenience only and is not intended
to convey any meaning or have any significance for Federal tax
purposes.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011