- 2 -
deficiency in petitioner’s Federal income tax due of $1,101 for
tax year 2004. The only issue remaining is whether petitioner
has shown that there are appropriate circumstances for vacating
or revising our decision. We hold that he has not, and therefore
we shall deny petitioner’s motion.
Background
At all times in this case, petitioner resided in Houston,
Texas.
During a hearing on October 24, 2007, the parties stipulated
that the determinations in a notice of deficiency that respondent
issued to petitioner on September 11, 2006, were correct.
According to the notice of deficiency, petitioner failed to
report and pay taxes on $43 of taxable wages and $8,580 of
unemployment compensation on his 2004 Federal income tax return,
resulting in a deficiency of $1,101 in petitioner’s Federal
income tax for 2004. At the hearing, petitioner conceded all
legal and factual issues in the case. The parties moved for
entry of a decision, and an order and decision sustaining
respondent’s determination of petitioner’s deficiency was
entered.
On November 28, 2007, petitioner filed a motion to vacate
our order and decision pursuant to Rule 162. Petitioner
apparently seeks to withdraw his concessions but offers no
specific guidance on which concessions he seeks to withdraw or a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008