- 8 -
respondent’s Austin Service Center as grounds for discarding his
records was not reasonable.
Petitioner implies that he should prevail because he is
without fault insofar as the erroneous refund is concerned. Any
such argument is unavailing in light of petitioner’s failure to
file a return and report his tax obligation for any of the years
at issue.
B. Effect of Prior Remittances
By the petition, and on brief, petitioner argues that
respondent determined deficiencies for 1996 and 1997 without
taking into account the 1996 and 1997 remittances. Respondent
concedes the fact of the remittances but argues that the
remittances are irrelevant to the determination of the 1996 and
1997 deficiencies. We agree with respondent.
For Federal income tax purposes, the word “deficiency” has a
specific meaning. It is defined in section 6211(a) as the amount
by which the tax imposed exceeds the excess of--
(1) the sum of
(A) the amount shown as the tax by the
taxpayer upon his return, if a return was
made by the taxpayer and an amount was shown
as the tax by the taxpayer thereon, plus
(B) the amounts previously assessed (or
collected without assessment) as a
deficiency, over--
(2) the amount of rebates, as defined in
subsection (b)(2), made.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011