Attorney-at-Law

A POST-HOLIDAY BARGAIN

In Uncategorized on 01/05/2017 at 00:46

In my youth, the bargains were found in January, when the bedclothing sales began. I remember hearing about these minutes after the cries of “Happy New Year!”

Well, apparently Judge Morrison continues the tradition in Amnesty National, Docket No. 13961-15L, filed 1/4/17.

Amnesty National was fighting a SNOD for one year, and a NOD for that year and another.

“Through an affidavit and attached documents, the IRS demonstrated that the notice of deficiency had been sent to Amnesty National. The IRS alleged that Amnesty National did not deny receiving the notice of deficiency. In Amnesty National’s response to the motion for summary judgment, Amnesty National did not claim to have received the notice of deficiency. We conclude that Amnesty National received the notice of deficiency. See Rule121(d). It is therefore barred from contesting the amount of its income tax liability for 2008. Sec.6330(c)(2)(B); Treas. Reg. sec. 301.6330-1(e)(3) Q&A-E2.” Order, at p. 4.

I thought that if the SNOD was sent to last known address, receipt by addressee was irrelevant. So whatever Amnesty National claimed about receipt was irrelevant, right, Judge?

Amnesty National got an equivalent hearing as to NFTLs, so those are off the Tax Court radar.

But the CDP for the NITLs are on, except Amnesty National had no collection alternatives. One NITL involved worker classification, Amnesty National got a chance to contest liability, and put in no relevant evidence.

Amnesty National did engage in this litigation, and thereby hangs the cliché.

Of course IRS wants summary J.

“Amnesty National’s response to the motion for summary judgment consists of meritless claims. For example, it asserts that the actions of the IRS are void because IRS employees are not licensed by the State of New Jersey. Amnesty National also claims that the IRS’s motion for summary judgment should be denied because the IRS did not respond to a court paper Amnesty National filed in this case entitled ‘Notice of Motion’. But the Court did not order the IRS to respond to the ‘Notice of Motion’, which consists of legalistic gibberish. Summary judgment in favor of the IRS is merited.” Order, at p. 4.

IRS also wanted a Section 6673 frivolity chop.

Judge Morrison finds Amnesty National both interposed frivolous arguments and prolonged the proceedings to delay payment of taxes, but makes no mention of any previous delictions of that kind. The usual treatment in such case is the yellow card warning that other or further frivolities will lead to the Section 6673 sin bin.

Although Judge Morrison didn’t mention it, Amnesty National had been in Tax Court twelve (count ‘em, twelve) years ago about a dubious refund claim that generated 2004 T. C. Memo. 221, filed 9/29/04, where Judge Chiechi likewise found irrelevant and incomprehensible arguments.

Maybe that was why he didn’t show the yellow card, but handed out a chop.

$200. A bargain.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: