- 3 -
FINDINGS OF FACT2
Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.
The stipulation of facts, the supplemental stipulation of facts,
and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this
2We note that our resolution of the issues in this case has
been made more difficult by petitioners’ failure to comply with
our Rules regarding the form and content of briefs. Our Rules
require that proposed findings of fact be complete and that they
“consist of a concise statement of essential fact and not a
recital of testimony nor a discussion or argument relating to the
evidence or the law.” Rule 151(e)(1). Petitioners’ entire
proposed findings of fact consist of the following:
1. The respondent’s mailing of an audit appointment
letter to petitioners on or about July 16, 1998, to
petitioners at Unionstone Lane, San Rafael, California,
did not “commence an examination” of the petitioners’
1996 tax return within the meaning of IRC Sec. 7491.
(See Exhibit 10-R)
2. The respondent did not otherwise “commence an
examination” of the petitioners’ 1996 tax return within
the meaning of IRC Sec. 7491 before July 22, 1998.
3. The petitioners presented credible evidence of a
net operating loss carryforward to 1996 at least
sufficient to reduce to zero the amount of income tax
owed for 1996.
4. The petitioners presented credible evidence of a
net operating loss carryforward to 1997 at least
sufficient to reduce to zero the amount of income tax
owed for 1997.
5. The burden of proof shifted to the respondent with
respect to the factual issues underlying the proposed
deficiencies for 1996 and 1997.
6. The respondent failed to meet his burden of proof
with respect to the evidence presented in support of
the net operating loss carryovers to 1996 and 1997.
7. The petitioners owe no penalties for 1996 and 1997.
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