Joseph T. Tornichio - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
          raise “relevant issues”.  In support of this last-mentioned                 
          allegation, the petition cross-references portions of                       
          petitioner’s purported transcript of the Appeals Office hearing             
          in which petitioner sought unsuccessfully to engage the Appeals             
          officer in a colloquy as to whether the Internal Revenue Code               
          establishes any liability to pay income taxes.                              
               After the hearing but before trial, respondent provided                
          petitioner with computer transcripts of his account for the 3 tax           
          years at issue and a copy of Monaghan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.           
          2002-16, in which this Court imposed penalties under section                
          6673(a)(1) for the taxpayer’s taking frivolous positions.                   
          G.  Petitioner’s Refund Actions                                             
               Pursuant to section 6702, respondent assessed a $500                   
          frivolous return penalty against petitioner for each of the years           
          at issue, as well as for other years.  After respondent had                 
          collected these penalties for 1994 and 1995, petitioner filed an            
          action in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio             
          seeking a refund of these amounts.  In this action, petitioner              
          relied “essentially on the same arguments he asserted in the                
          attachments to his tax returns.”  Tornichio v. United States, 81            
          AFTR 2d 98-1377, at 98-1379, 98-1 USTC par. 50,299, at 83,681               
          (N.D. Ohio 1998).3  The District Court dismissed petitioner’s               


               3 In a separate action, petitioner sought to have the U.S.             
          District Court for the Northern District of Ohio review the                 
                                                             (continued...)           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011