- 10 -
Hodgson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-122; Bourbeau v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-117; Williams v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2003-83; Kaye v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-74; Smith v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-45; Eiselstein v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2003-22; Gunselman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-
11; Young v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-6; Tornichio v.
Commissioner, T.C. 2002-291; Land v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2002-263; Perry v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-165; Smeton v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-140; Newman v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2002-135; Coleman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-132;
Williams v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-111; Weishan v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-88, affd. 66 Fed. Appx. 113 (9th
Cir. 2003). In some such cases, penalties have been imposed by
the Court sua sponte. See, e.g., Robinson v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2003-77; Keene v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-277;
Schmith v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-252; Schroeder v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-190.
Section 6673(a)(1) provides:
Procedures instituted primarily for delay,
etc.--Whenever it appears to the Tax Court that--
(A) proceedings before it have been
instituted or maintained by the taxpayer
primarily for delay,
(B) the taxpayer’s position in such
proceeding is frivolous or groundless, or
(C) the taxpayer unreasonably failed to
pursue available administrative remedies,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011