- 53 -
Cir. 2000); SEC v. Monarch Funding Corp., 192 F.3d 295 (2d Cir.
1999); United States v. Barnette, 10 F.3d 1553 (11th Cir. 1994).
We do not know what evidence that court had before it when making
those comments. Suffice it to say, the record in this case
clearly and convincingly leads us to the conclusion that
petitioner intended to fraudulently evade the payment of his
taxes for 1990, 1991, and 1992.
Petitioner also argued that assessment is barred by section
6501(a), as the period of limitations for assessing tax had
expired. Since we have held that respondent has established by
clear and convincing evidence that petitioner underpaid his tax
liabilities for 1990, 1991, and 1992 and that such underpayments
were due to fraud, the statute of limitations does not bar
respondent’s assessment and collection activities. See sec.
6501(c)(1); Plunkett v. Commissioner, 465 F.2d 299 (7th Cir.
1972), affg. T.C. Memo. 1970-274; DiLeo v. Commissioner, 96 T.C.
at 880.
Decision will be entered
under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011