- 8 -
determinations of petitioners’ tax liability and additions to tax
are correct.
II. Admissibility of Respondent’s Exhibits
Respondent introduced the following exhibits at trial to
which Terry objected on the grounds that the declarations and
accompanying documentation did not satisfy the substantive
requirements of rule 803(6) and rule 902(11) of the Federal Rules
of Evidence: (1) Copies of Form 4340, for each petitioner for
2001; (2) declarations of (and accompanying Forms 1099) Julie
Yows, Donna Cooper, Deborah S. Kerns, and Marlene Mills; and (3)
copies of three checks from Dollarhide payable to Major Computer
Services.7
In general, section 7453 and Rule 143(a) provide that Tax
Court proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with the rules
of evidence (Federal Rules of Evidence) applicable in trials
without a jury in the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia. Clough v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 183, 188
(2002).
7 The Court notes that respondent submitted two exhibits
consisting of checks from Dollarhide to Major Computer Services.
At trial, Terry objected to one of the two exhibits, identified
as “8-R”, but he did not offer any objection to an exhibit that
was substantially similar, identified as “7-R”. The Court
admitted both exhibits into evidence. However, on brief, it
appears that petitioners now object to the admission of both
exhibits “7-R” and “8-R”.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011