Roy Jay Stallard - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
                                         b.                                           
                       Liability for payment of debt, line 16.                        
                    6.  The Commissioner erred in determining that I                  
               am the person made liable for the payment of                           
               $1,371.00[4] * * *.  The error is an error of commis-                  
               sion.                                                                  
                                        FACTS                                         
                    a.  Either I am or I am not the person made liable                
               by a particular statutory provision that describes the                 
               person made liable or for payment, or in the alterna-                  
               tive, I am or I am not made liable for its payment by                  
               non-statutory law.  We are left to guess at what that                  
               law might be, but whatever the law might be, I deny                    
               liability for want of notice.                                          
                    b.  The Commissioner made a determination based                   
               upon presumption or inference rather than law and fact.                
               Because the notice of deficiency does not specify the                  
               law or fact upon which determination of liability shown                
               on line 16 is based, I am without knowledge as to the                  
               basis for the purported debt due to the Commissioner’s                 
               non-disclosure of it, and therefor I am unable to frame                
               a more specific assignment of error.                                   
                    7.  I request that the amount shown on line 16 of                 
               the form 4595A be set to zero for want of any factual                  
               or legal basis or because the amount shown was deter-                  
               mined by inference, presumption, wishful thinking or                   
               some other inappropriate methodology, but not by the                   
               application of specific law to specific fact.  Revenue                 
               Due process is not some carnival guessing game where                   
               the law is hidden under a shell and the player may be                  
               slapped with an outrageous penalty for failing to                      
               detect the palming of it by a debt trickster.                          
               On January 5, 2006, the Court issued an Order in which it              
          (1) noted that it had returned unfiled to petitioner on December            
          7, 2005, petitioner’s document that the Court received from                 
          petitioner on December 6, 2005, and (2) ordered petitioner to               

               4See supra note 3.                                                     





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011