-5-
b.) The respondent has no lawful evidence to
substantiate its issuance of a statutory notice of
deficiency in compliance to law as specified by the
Secretary in Title 26 CRF part 601.103(c)(2) and the
Federal Rules of Evidence as expressed in Court Rule
143.
c.) The respondent has issued a non statutory Letter
531(DO) to fraudulently induce the Petitioner to
secure re-determination of a non existent Notice of
Deficiency.
d.) The respondent has not lawfully determined a legal
assessment substantiating an issuance of a notice of
deficiency in accordance to its administrative rules
and regulations; it has chosen to issue a non statutory
notice of deficiency and waiver as this Letter 531 (DO)
purporting to be the respondent’s “90 day Letter”.
Following the filing of petitioner’s amended petition,
respondent filed a supplement to his motion to dismiss for
failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Respondent reiterated in his supplement that petitioner has still
failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Petitioner has filed a response to respondent’s motion.
Rule 34(b)(4) requires that a petition filed in this Court
contain clear and concise assignments of each and every error
that the petitioning taxpayer alleges to have been committed by
the Commissioner in the determination of any deficiency, addition
to tax, or penalty in dispute. Rule 34(b)(5) further requires
that the petition shall contain clear and concise lettered
statements of the facts on which the taxpayer bases the
assignments of error. See Funk v. Commissioner, 123 T.C. 213,
215 (2004); Jarvis v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 646, 658 (1982). Any
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011