- 4 - Petitioner filed an amended petition in which she alleged that she had filed a tax return for 1999, that all of respondent’s determinations were in error, and that she was due a refund of $1,609. By letter, an Appeals officer requested additional information about petitioner’s dependency exemptions, sales of stocks and bonds, and receipt of distributions. Petitioner provided additional documents to respondent, but the case remained unresolved. This case was subsequently set for trial at a San Francisco trial session but was continued upon petitioner’s oral motion. Respondent asked petitioner to provide information with respect to certain income items that did not appear to be reported on petitioner’s return, information verifying petitioner’s basis in securities, and information verifying certain rental expenses she had deducted. Respondent also sent petitioner a letter summarizing the information that had been verified as of that time and requesting additional information. Petitioner failed to provide the information. Respondent’s counsel informed petitioner by letter that, pursuant to Rule 91, the parties are required to submit a stipulation of facts to the Court. Respondent’s counsel proposed a meeting to complete the stipulation of facts and advised petitioner to provide documentation if she intended to claimPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011