- 7 -
difficult to believe that petitioner was blind-sided by this
evidence.
Finally, petitioner had an opportunity to obtain the
evidence presented at trial. Respondent contacted petitioner to
coordinate a conference for December 15, 2003, before trial.
Petitioner stated he could not attend that meeting and instead
informed respondent that he would be making discovery requests of
respondent. However, petitioner failed to take steps to meet
with respondent at any other time or to engage in any discovery
whatsoever. Instead, on February 19, 2004, petitioner objected
on the basis of self-incrimination and the Fifth Amendment to all
of respondent’s proposed stipulations of fact, except for the two
relating to the notices of deficiency and petitioner’s residence.
Petitioner thus failed to cooperate with respondent and thwarted
respondent’s attempts to stipulate facts by asserting baseless
constitutional arguments. The Court’s patience for such
arguments in this civil case wears thin where there is no
indication that petitioner’s cooperation with respondent’s
requests would lead to criminal prosecution. Petitioner cannot
now claim that he is prejudiced or that he did not have an
opportunity to challenge respondent’s evidence. Accordingly, we
again find that it was proper for respondent to have determined
income for the subject years from the information received from
third parties and that respondent’s determination and the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011