- 4 -
The Motion
By the motion, petitioner seeks summary adjudication in its
favor on three issues: (1) Whether Investments properly reported
its built-in gain tax liability on its 1999 Federal income tax
return; (2) the delinquency addition, and (3) the accuracy-
related penalty.
Petitioner claims that the undisputed evidence in the case
shows that Investments’s calculation of the 1999 built-in gain
tax liability was supported by prior returns, audited financial
statements, and a 1995 calculation of net unrealized built-in
gain utilizing a contemporaneous valuation of the assets subject
to built-in gain tax, “which was performed by an independent,
well-respected appraiser.”
Petitioner argues:
Because * * * [Investments] has properly
calculated its built-in gain tax liability and because
Respondent does not possess any evidence to the
contrary, Petitioner is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law on the issue of Petitioner’s proper
built-in gain tax liability and on the accuracy-related
penalty and “delinquency penalty” imposed by Respondent
in regard to the built-in gain tax liability.
Petitioner supports his argument with a “Statement of
Undisputed Material Facts” containing 26 numbered statements of
facts that petitioner claims are undisputed and established by
the petition, answer, and various documents and affidavits.
Accompanying the motion are Exhibits A through O.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011