Richard N. Pate - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
               On July 17, 2006, while residing in Justin, Texas,                     
          petitioner filed his petition.  In the petition, the assignment             
          of error states in its entirety:                                            
               Set aside the notice of determination on the grounds                   
               the Appeals Officer failed to verify the requirements                  
               of all applicable law or administrative procedure were                 
               met in determining the liability, thus creating an                     
               abuse of discretion.  Specifically, Respondent ignored                 
               the requirements at IRC 6012 & 151(d) and the Paperwork                
               Reduction Act of 1995.  Petitioner has not been                        
               presented with a proper information collection request                 
               displaying a currently valid OMB control number, and                   
               the exemption amount is unspecified in law.  There are                 
               multiple violations of the 1995 PRA bearing upon the                   
               making of a return, and Respondent ignores the 1995 Act                
               while adhering to the 1980 Act.                                        
                                     Discussion                                       
               Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation and                
          avoid unnecessary and expensive trials.  Fla. Peach Corp. v.                
          Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988).  Summary judgment may be             
          granted where there is no genuine issue of any material fact, and           
          a decision may be rendered as a matter of law.  Rule 121(a) and             
          (b); see Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 518, 520                 
          (1992), affd. 17 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 1994); Zaentz v.                        
          Commissioner, 90 T.C. 753, 754 (1988).  The moving party bears              
          the burden of proving that there is no genuine issue of material            
          fact, and factual inferences will be read in a manner most                  
          favorable to the party opposing summary judgment.  Dahlstrom v.             
          Commissioner, 85 T.C. 812, 821 (1985); Jacklin v. Commissioner,             






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

Last modified: November 10, 2007