- 4 -
or to comply with the Rules of this Court. See Rule 123(b);
Meeker v. Commissioner, supra; Ward v. Commissioner, supra.
We agree with respondent that petitioner has failed to state
a claim upon which relief can be granted. See Funk v.
Commissioner, supra at 216-217; Meeker v. Commissioner, supra.
Petitioner has failed to present the Court with a petition
containing clear and concise assignments of error that petitioner
alleges the Commissioner has committed in the determination of
the deficiency or the additions related thereto. Petitioner has
likewise failed to include in his petition clear and concise
statements of the facts on which he bases his assignments of
error. Petitioner’s petition contains only the type of frivolous
arguments that have been repeatedly made and rejected by this and
other courts. See, e.g., Funk v. Commissioner, supra. The
petition neither conforms to this Court’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure nor states a claim upon which relief can be based. Due
to the absence from the petition of specific justiciable
allegations of error and of supporting facts, this Court shall
grant respondent’s motion. See id.
In respondent’s motion, respondent also asks the Court to
impose a penalty on petitioner under section 6673. Section
6673(a)(1) authorizes this Court to require a taxpayer to pay to
the United States a penalty not in excess of $25,000 whenever it
appears that proceedings have been instituted or maintained by
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011