Albert M. Kun - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
          Ct. at 1552.  Petitioner contends that “It is clear from the                
          record that the Respondent failed to comply with this                       
          requirement.  The assessment has not been reordered (sic) until             
          September 11, 2003 well outside the 3 years requirement.”  As               
          respondent points out in his response to petitioner’s motion,               
          however, petitioner does not state any basis for his belief.                
          According to respondent, “the record before the Court indicates             
          that Petitioner’s 1995 through 1999 income tax liabilities were             
          assessed within 3 years of Petitioner filing his tax returns.”              
               Petitioner failed to present any evidence at trial in                  
          support of his contention that his 1995-99 income tax liabilities           
          were not timely assessed, and that failure also infects his                 
          motion.  We can find nothing in the record to support his                   
          allegation; in fact, the record demonstrates that the assessments           
          in question were timely.  Moreover, there is nothing in the                 
          Supreme Court’s opinion in United States v. Galletti, supra, to             
          suggest that our Memorandum Opinion in this case was in error or            
          that our decision must be vacated.                                          
               Petitioner has not asserted sufficient grounds for vacating            
          the decision, nor has he cited any opinion of any court that                













Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011