- 3 -
We are satisfied that there is no genuine issue as to any
material fact and that a decision may be rendered as a matter of
law. For the reasons that follow, we shall grant the motion.
Background
By notice of deficiency dated September 20, 2000 (the
notice), respondent determined deficiencies in income tax
(deficiencies) and accuracy-related penalties (penalties) as
follows:
Taxable
(Calendar) Penalty
Year Deficiency Sec. 6662(a)
1996 $82,807 $16,561
1997 68,812 13,762
1998 59,210 11,842
Enclosed with the notice was an explanation stating that the
deficiencies result principally from respondent’s disregard of
certain trust arrangements (as shams or for certain other stated
reasons) and that the penalties are due to negligence, an
understatement of tax, or a misstatement of value.
The petition states that petitioner disputes respondent’s
determinations and assigns the following errors: (1) Respondent
had no authority to make a determination, (2) the “deficiency”
failed to identify the statute that was relied on to claim the
deficiency, (3) respondent did not provide proof of a “statutory
procedurally correct” assessment, (4) respondent failed to
produce a witness, (5) the statute of limitations had expired as
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011