Attorney-at-Law

IRS HORSING AROUND?

In Uncategorized on 01/21/2026 at 18:39

Looks like that’s what Siemens USA Holdings, Inc., & Consolidated Subsidiaries, Docket No. 3989-24, filed 1/21/26, claims. IRS makes the by-now commonplace motion for partial summary J on Boss Hossery, but Siemens & Cons objects.

Ex-Ch J Kathleen (“TBS = The Big Shillelagh”) Kerrigan doesn’t give us much detail as she tosses ITRS’ motion.

“In its Sur-Reply petitioner raises concerns about the penalty form being altered and references respondent’s Motion for Leave to File First Amended Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.” Order, at pp. 2-3.

The First Amended motion papers state “that a misstatement was made, and respondent produced new exhibits pertaining to the misstatement to petitioner.” Order, at p. 3.

Who misstated what is not made clear.

But it’s enough of a fact question for ex-Ch J TBS to deny the motion.

In the dozen years since The Great Chieftain of the Jersey Boys first unloaded the Section 6751(b) defense (see my blogpost “Penalty Kick,” 7/17/14), it has furnished a bumper crop of blogfodder.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.