- 29 -
adjudicative facts for purposes of the instant litigation.
Petitioners seem to be attempting to employ a motion for judicial
notice in a manner more akin to a supplemental brief. Their
motion essentially calls to the Court’s attention an unrelated
case that they feel is pertinent and supportive of their
position.
However, even leaving aside for the moment procedural
complications and considering the case as we would any other
cited precedent, the Court notes that the quoted statements from
United States v. Smith, supra at 1010, do not assist petitioners
here. Considered in context, the alleged concessions simply
stand for the unremarkable proposition that there can exist
legitimate unincorporated business entities, the income of which
may be properly reported on Forms 1041. The question before us
is whether HGAMC and HGRCT were such legitimate entities or
whether they were part of a sham arrangement designed to avoid
taxes and should be disregarded for tax purposes. This is an
inquiry that we resolve infra based on all the facts and
circumstances of petitioners’ particular situation. The fact
that in an unrelated case decided nearly a decade after the
transactions here at issue Government agents made certain
relatively generic legal statements would not affect our
analysis. Petitioners’ motion will be denied as moot.
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011