- 3 -
year, but respondent did not determine a deficiency of $1,459
attributable to petitioner’s wage income that she received during
1998 from Spartanburg Medical Center.
On August 19, 2002, respondent filed a motion for leave to
file an amendment to answer (respondent’s motion to amend an-
swer), in which respondent alleged an increased deficiency for
petitioner’s taxable year 1998 in the amount of $1,459 attribut-
able to petitioner’s wage income of $16,679.62 from Spartanburg
Medical Center.3
On August 20, 2002, the Court ordered petitioner to file a
written response to respondent’s motion to amend answer. On
September 4, 2002, instead of filing such a response, petitioner
submitted to the Court a document that the Court had filed as
petitioner’s motion to dismiss (petitioner’s September 4, 2002
motion to dismiss).
In an Order dated September 5, 2002 (September 5, 2002
3In respondent’s amendment to answer, respondent alleges in
part:
(c) Inasmuch as the Service Center initially
assessed the income from Spartanburg Regional Medical
Center under the math error provisions of I.R.C.
� 6213(b)(1), respondent did not include the * * *
$16,679.62 from Spartanburg Regional Medical Center in
his determination of unreported income set forth in the
notice of deficiency for 1998 * * *
(d) Subsequently, respondent * * * abated the math
error assessment of the tax resulting from the income
received from Spartanburg Regional Medical Center.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011