Sam F. and Ingrid D. Ford - Page 20

                                       - 20 -                                         
          whether they had been presented to the grand jury.  In re Grand             
          Jury Matter, 697 F.2d 511, 513 (3d Cir. 1982).                              
               In view of the foregoing, we hold that petitioners have not            
          shown that respondent's deficiency determination was based upon             
          matters before the grand jury.  Moreover, even if the                       
          determination had been based upon matters occurring before a                
          grand jury, these matters were disclosed in the later criminal              
          proceedings against petitioner and thus were no longer subject to           
          the secrecy requirements of rule 6(e).                                      
               Since we have held that respondent's use of exhibit 3 did              
          not violate rule 6(e), we have no occasion to consider whether              
          shifting the burden of proof as to the deficiencies at issue                
          would be an appropriate remedy for a violation of that rule.  See           
          DiLeo v. Commissioner, 959 F.2d at 21.                                      
               Respondent's Motion                                                    
               On January 30, 2003, respondent filed the second motion now            
          before us, seeking leave to file an amendment to the answer to              
          the amended petition.  Respondent's motion refers to an alleged             
          statement of petitioners' counsel during a telephone conference             
          call with this Court.  In that statement, petitioners' counsel              
          allegedly indicated that the $2.8 million of unreported income              
          which petitioner admitted in the allocution of his criminal case            
          was not the same unreported income which is set forth in the                
          notice of deficiency for petitioners' taxable year 1986.                    

Page:  Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011