- 4 -
he requested a continuance and attached a copy of his previous
letter. We filed this submission as a motion to continue and set
a hearing to consider it on April 7, 2003.
Petitioner did not appear for the hearing on his motion to
continue or the scheduled trial session. Respondent filed a
motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution and requested a trial
to present testimony and other evidence in support of his
determination of fraud. We denied petitioner’s motion to
continue, held a trial to receive respondent’s evidence, and
ordered petitioner to file a response to respondent’s motion to
dismiss within 30 days.
Petitioner did not file a response to respondent’s motion to
dismiss. By order dated May 19, 2003, we granted respondent’s
motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution as to the deficiencies3
and scheduled the filing of seriatim briefs on the issue of
fraud. On the day before his brief was due, petitioner mailed a
letter to the Court stating: “I received a letter denying my
3 In the amended petition, petitioner averred that the
periods of limitation for assessing tax for his 1995 and 1996
taxable years had expired before the June 1, 2001, issuance of
the notice of deficiency for those years. However, the evidence
adduced by respondent at trial includes Forms 872, Consent to
Extend the Time to Assess Tax, executed by petitioner, that
extended the period for assessment for 1995 and 1996 until June
30, 2001.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011