Edward F. Murphy - Page 22

                                        - 22 -                                        
          the admission of petitioner’s trial testimony and, with one                 
          exception, also sustain it with respect to the admission of Ms.             
          Boudreau’s trial testimony.  Our reasons are as follows.                    
                    2.  Petitioner’s Trial Testimony                                  
               In Robinette v. Commissioner, supra, we admitted testimony             
          and documents not provided to Appeals on a showing that the                 
          evidence presented at trial related to issues raised at the                 
          taxpayer’s section 6330 hearing and was relevant and admissible             
          under the Federal Rules of Evidence.                                        
               The sole issue raised by petitioner at the section 6330                
          hearing was a collection alternative; i.e., the offer in                    
          compromise.  Petitioner submitted to Ms. Boudreau an IRS Form               
          656, Offer in Compromise, on which he checked boxes indicating              
          that the basis of the offer was either doubt as to collectibility           
          or effective tax administration.  He indicated on the form that             
          there were special circumstances (which he may have neglected to            
          describe).  During the October 3 meeting, Ms. Boudreau asked Mr.            
          Burke to describe petitioner’s special circumstances.  Mr. Burke            
          responded, but not fully, since petitioner had prohibited him               
          from discussing the nature of petitioner’s illness.  At trial,              
          Mr. Burke stated that petitioner wished to testify so that he               


               6(...continued)                                                        
          parties to the contrary, appeal of this case would lie to the               
          Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.  See sec. 7482(b).                  





Page:  Previous  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011