Stephanie K. Mills - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          6654 addition determined in this case.  See Wheeler v.                      
          Commissioner, 127 T.C. 200, 211-212 (2006).                                 
          Conclusion Regarding Deficiency Determinations                              
               On the basis of the foregoing, we conclude that respondent's           
          motion to dismiss should be granted, and that a decision                    
          sustaining respondent's determinations of an income tax                     
          deficiency and additions to tax for 2001 should be entered.                 
          Section 6673(a)(1) Penalty                                                  
               Section 6673(a)(1) authorizes the Court to award a penalty             
          not in excess of $25,000 when proceedings have been instituted or           
          maintained primarily for delay, or where the taxpayer's position            
          is frivolous or groundless.  See, e.g., Coleman v. Commissioner,            
          791 F.2d 68, 71 (7th Cir. 1986); Kish v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.           
          1998-16; Talmage v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-114, affd.                
          without published opinion 101 F.3d 695 (4th Cir. 1996).                     
          Respondent has moved for imposition of such a penalty.                      
               The nature of petitioner's conduct in this case strongly               
          suggests that she instituted this proceeding primarily for the              
          purpose of delay.  She presented no evidence to support her                 
          general and vague allegations that she had no taxable income in             
          2001.  Her conduct in arranging with the Court for a date and               
          time certain for her trial and then failing to appear, sending              
          instead counsel with no evidence to proffer and no effective                
          authority to prosecute the case, was misleading and particularly            

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

Last modified: November 10, 2007