- 14 - filed the summary judgment motion timely; (5) and whether the representative of respondent has legal authority to act on behalf of respondent. Petitioners, though, do not present the Court with any specific facts showing any genuine issue for trial despite this Court’s express requirement for such a showing. See Rule 121(d). Petitioners’ repeated assertions of the existence of questions of fact are insufficient and without foundation, and we conclude that this case is appropriate for summary judgment. A. Respondent’s Adjustments Are Sustained 1. Deficiencies Gross income includes all income from whatever source derived. Sec. 61(a). Respondent’s determinations in a notice of deficiency are presumed correct. Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Petitioners merely allege that respondent’s determination of deficiencies in, and additions to, tax are incorrect. The arguments they put forward are frivolous and without merit. Petitioners contend that the Individual Master File (IMF) for each petitioner has incorrect information and that they have no tax liability. Petitioners’ contentions, however, are blanket statements, and they provide no support for their bare allegations that there are genuine issues for trial. Moreover, petitioners have not produced any information or set forth any specific facts to contradict the gross income reflected on petitioners’ W-2 statements and 1099 forms. We hold that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact.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