- 6 - challenges to the underlying tax liabilities. Hoffman v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 140, 145 (2002); Rodriguez v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-153; MacElvain v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-320. That petitioners received and contested a notice of deficiency for 1974, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, and 1981, resulting in the entry of a stipulated decision that there are deficiencies in their income taxes for those years, is not in dispute. Petitioners are therefore precluded by section 6330(d)(2)(B) from challenging the amounts of the deficiencies or the timeliness of the statutory notice as a matter of law. Res Judicata Petitioners are precluded not only by operation of section 6330(c)(2)(B) from raising the issue of the period of limitations on assessment; they are so precluded by the doctrine of res judicata. At the hearing on respondent’s motion, the Court questioned petitioner, a practicing attorney, as to the application of the doctrine of res judicata to this case. In petitioners’ brief in opposition to respondent’s motion, petitioners assert that the questioning by the Court was a surprise because “Res Judicata was not mentioned in the written motion by the Respondent”. The Court calls petitioners’ attention to pages 16 through 20 of respondent’s motion. There, respondent argues that due to the application of the doctrine ofPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011