- 4 -
For the reasons stated below, we hold that the notice of
deficiency was timely as to the 1995 and 1996 tax years because
it was issued within the 6-year period of limitations provided in
section 6501(e)(1)(A). We further hold that the premature
assessment of deficiencies for 1995, 1996, and 1997 and
subsequent abatement of those assessments does not bar respondent
from reassessing those deficiencies.
Background
The parties submitted these cases fully stipulated, pursuant
to Rule 122. The stipulation of facts, supplemental stipulation
of facts, and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by
this reference.
Petitioners are Thomas E. and Sara Anne Connell
(petitioners) and four trusts, The Connell Business Co., The
Connell Family Trust, The Connell Vehicle Co., and The Connell
Vehicle Co. #101 (collectively, petitioner trusts). At the time
they filed their petitions, petitioners resided in Dayton, Ohio,
and the petitioner trusts’ addresses were in Dayton, Ohio.
2(...continued)
petitioners have not met their burden of proving that they have
met the requirements of sec. 7491(a). See H. Conf. Rept.
105-599, at 239 (1998), 1998-3 C.B. 747, 993; S. Rept. 105-174,
at 45 (1998), 1998-3 C.B. 537, 581. For example, there is no
competent evidence establishing that petitioners cooperated
within the meaning of sec. 7491(a)(2)(B). In any event, the
results we reach with respect to petitioners’ estoppel,
admission, and res judicata claims do not depend upon the
allocation of the burden of proof.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011