- 15 -
12, 2001, well within the 6-year period of limitations. Because
the Basiles are deemed to have admitted the well-pleaded facts of
respondent’s answer and respondent’s requests for admission
stating that they received additional income in excess of 25
percent of what they reported on their 1996 return, respondent
has met his burden of proving that the notice of deficiency for
1996 was timely mailed and the 6-year period of limitations under
section 6501(e) applies.
Conclusion
Petitioners have failed to comply with the Rules and
requirements of this Court, and the record reveals no reason to
excuse petitioners’ inactivity and otherwise noncompliant
behavior. Moreover, we are satisfied that the well-pleaded facts
in respondent’s answer and the deemed admissions provide an
adequate factual basis for concluding that the period of
limitations for assessing the 1996 liability under section 6501
has not expired. Consequently, we shall grant respondent’s
motion for default pursuant to Rule 123(a).
To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order and
decision granting respondent’s
motion for judgment by default will
be entered in each docket.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: May 25, 2011