Richard E. Marks - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         
          these arguments have some colorable merit.”  Id. (quoting Crain             
          v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417 (5th Cir. 1984), affg. an Order of           
          this Court).                                                                
               Petitioner has again failed to comply with Rule 34(b)(4) and           
          (5) by failing to set forth in his petition any justiciable claim           
          or facts related thereto.  Neither were any such claims or facts            
          raised or alleged at trial or at any other time in this                     
          proceeding.  Petitioner introduced not one iota of credible                 
          evidence with respect to any factual issue relevant to                      
          ascertaining the tax liability in issue.1  Furthermore, it is               
          clear that petitioner has brought this frivolous case solely for            
          purposes of delay and for the advancement of his personal views.            
          We will therefore dismiss this case and enter a decision against            
          petitioner under Rule 123(b).  Rule 123(b) provides:                        
               For failure of a petitioner properly to prosecute                      
               or to comply with these Rules or any order of the Court                
               or for other cause which the Court deems sufficient,                   
               the Court may dismiss a case at any time and enter a                   
               decision against the petitioner.  The Court may, for                   
               similar reasons, decide against any party any issue as                 
               to which such party has the burden of proof, and such                  
               decision shall be treated as a dismissal for purposes                  
               of paragraphs (c) and (d) of this Rule.                                

          1         Because petitioner failed to introduce any credible               
          evidence, he failed to meet the requirements of sec. 7491(a), as            
          amended, so as to place the burden of proof on respondent with              
          respect to any factual issue relevant to ascertaining liability             
          for the tax deficiency in issue.  As to the addition to tax and             
          accuracy-related penalty, we find that respondent has satisfied             
          his burden of production under sec. 7491(c) because the record              
          shows that petitioner’s return was filed late.  Higbee v.                   
          Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438 (2001).                                          

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011