- 4 -
limitations on assessments had expired before respondent issued
the notice of deficiency.
Respondent filed an answer to the petition. Respondent’s
answer included affirmative allegations in response to
petitioners’ argument that the period of limitations had expired
before respondent issued the notice of deficiency.
As indicated, respondent filed a Motion for Summary
Judgment. Relying on Wilkins v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 109
(2003), and other cases, respondent contends that the Internal
Revenue Code does not allow a credit (or any other deduction or
allowance) for slavery reparations. In addition, citing section
6501(a) and (b)(1), respondent contends that petitioners’ tax
return for 2000 was deemed filed on April 15, 2001, and,
therefore, that the March 24, 2004 notice of deficiency was
issued to petitioners within the applicable 3-year period of
limitations. In the absence of any dispute as to a material
fact, respondent maintains that he is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law.
By Order dated November 24, 2004, the Court directed
petitioners to file a written response to respondent’s motion.
Petitioners did not respond to the Court’s Order.
This matter was called for hearing at the Court’s motions
session in Washington, D.C. Counsel for respondent appeared at
the hearing and offered argument in support of respondent’s
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011