- 2 -
motion for summary judgment as to Mr. Holguin) and respondent’s
motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and to strike as to
petitioner Sally A. Holguin (respondent’s motion to dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction as to Ms. Holguin). (We shall refer collec-
tively to both of those motions as respondent’s motions.) We
shall grant respondent’s motions.
Background
The record establishes and/or the parties do not dispute the
following.
Petitioners resided in Las Vegas, Nevada, at the time they
filed the petition in this case.
On April 16, 1995, petitioners mailed to respondent Form
1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return (Form 1040), for their
taxable year 1994 (1994 Form 1040). Above their signatures
appearing in their 1994 Form 1040, petitioners struck from the
jurat clause the words “Under penalties of perjury”. Because
petitioners struck those words, respondent concluded that peti-
tioners’ 1994 Form 1040 was not a valid Federal income tax (tax)
return.2
In their 1994 Form 1040, petitioners reported total income
of $0 and total tax of $0 and claimed a refund of $1,020 of tax
withheld. Petitioners attached to their 1994 Form 1040 two Forms
2On Jan. 15, 1998, respondent prepared a separate substitute
for return for each petitioner with respect to the taxable year
1994.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011