- 11 -
substantiate expenses claimed on the returns. The notice sent to
petitioners from the Court setting this case for trial called to
the parties attention the requirement that the parties contact
each other promptly and cooperate fully in the preparation and
presentation of the case. Petitioners' failure to do this,
pursuant to Mr. Beltran's advice, satisfies the Court that
petitioners instituted and maintained this proceeding primarily
for delay.
The function of this Court is to provide a forum to decide
issues relating to liability for Federal taxes. Any reasonable
and prudent person, under the facts presented to the Court,
should have known that petitioners' claimed deductions could not
have been sustained, and petitioners knew that. This Court does
not and should not countenance the use of this Court as a vehicle
for disgruntled litigants to proclaim the wrongdoing of another,
their return preparer, as a basis for relief from penalties that
were determined by respondent on facts that clearly are not
sustainable. Golub v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-288.
Petitioners, therefore, have interfered with the Court's function
to the detriment of other parties having cases with legitimate
issues for the Court to consider. Petitioners have caused
needless expense and wasted resources, not only for the Court,
but for its personnel, respondent, and respondent's counsel.
Under these circumstances, the penalty under section 6673 is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011