- 8 -
When the cases were called from the calendar for trial on
September 11, 2006, petitioner again moved for a continuance. In
addition to her claims that she was too busy to produce documents
to respondent, petitioner alleged that her accountant had quit in
January 2006, 8 months earlier, and that she had hired a new
accountant “within the last two weeks”. Petitioner still could
not identify any erroneous income items included in respondent’s
determination or any deductions to which she claimed entitlement.
Given the opportunity to testify regarding the penalties, she
proceeded as follows:
THE WITNESS [petitioner]: Your Honor, I would
like to have it on the record that I am an extremely
busy physician in sole practice of obstetrics and
gynecology, which no one wants to practice in West
Virginia anymore.
I do high risk obstetrics because there are no
high risk obstetricians in my area. I have eight
thousand or approximately eight thousand patients now
registered in my computer, though I have more. I
perform a service by myself that no one else can do,
working 24 hours a day.
I have no vacation, and the last vacation I took
was in 1989. I have tried to work with the Court, and
I would like to meet with counsel to come up with a
settlement. I had just needed more time. My
accountant had quit suddenly in January, and as I
mentioned previously, I had thought I could do the work
myself, and I realized that I couldn’t at this time.
After asking for records from him, I * * * now
received them partially, and I have hired a new
accountant. I was led to believe that it was my right
to file zero if I expected that I would not owe taxes
because of my deductions and allowances.
THE COURT: Who told you that?
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011