- 5 -
the taxpayers have excess monthly income that would allow
them to full [sic] pay the tax liability in full. As such
an offer in compromise is inappropriate.
The file indicates that the Service has been attempting
to resolve this matter with the taxpayers since July 2000.
It is now almost 2 years later and still the taxpayers need
more time. I do not feel that additional time is
appropriate.
As a result of the notice of determination, petitioners filed the
instant petition.
The calendar call for the Cleveland, Ohio, trial session was
held on June 2, 2003. Mrs. Crisan did not appear at the calendar
call, and her default was entered. Petitioners’ motion for
continuance, filed May 27, 2003, and renewed at the trial, was
denied as untimely. The Court noted the “continuous delays”
caused by petitioners throughout the proceedings. Mr. Crisan
requested that he submit a trial memorandum and that the case be
submitted fully stipulated. The Court suggested that a trial be
held later that afternoon in order for Mr. Crisan to place
evidence, such as testimony, on the record. Mr. Crisan refused
the offer from the Court. Mr. Crisan stated that he chose to
forgo the trial by not testifying or submitting further evidence,
relying solely upon the stipulations and trial memoranda. The
Court granted Mr. Crisan’s request but warned Mr. Crisan that he
would be unable to submit any further evidence.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011