Paul McGowan - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         
          Court ruled in favor of petitioner in McGowan v. Commissioner,              
          T.C. Memo. 2004-146, and we incorporate herein the facts set                
          forth in that opinion.                                                      
                                     Background                                       
               In 1998, petitioner was convicted, pursuant to section                 
          7206(1), of filing false tax returns and, pursuant to section               
          7206(2), of aiding or assisting the filing of false tax returns             
          relating to 1991, 1992, and 1993.  The convictions were                     
          subsequently affirmed on appeal and became final.                           
               On October 15, 1999, respondent issued a 30-day letter to              
          petitioner proposing income tax deficiencies and fraud penalties            
          relating to 1991, 1992, and 1993.  Respondent’s 30-day letter               
          also advised petitioner of his opportunity for review by the                
          Office of Appeals.  Respondent received a letter from petitioner,           
          by mail postmarked November 26, 1999, requesting an additional 30           
          days to respond.  Respondent granted the extension, but                     
          petitioner did not respond within the extended period and did not           
          file a protest to the 30-day letter.  By notice of deficiency               
          dated September 6, 2001, respondent determined deficiencies of              
          $103,299, $36,968, and $67,180 and fraud penalties, pursuant to             
          section 6663, of $77,474, $27,726, and $50,385 relating to 1991,            
          1992, and 1993, respectively.  On December 4, 2001, petitioner              
          filed his petition with this Court.                                         
               In January of 2002, respondent called petitioner and                   






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011