Whittington v. Commissioner ( 2017 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 4 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SCOTT A. WHITTINGTON, Nos. 16-70199
16-70200
Petitioner-Appellant,
Tax Ct. Nos. 2060-13
v. 11096-14
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL MEMORANDUM*
REVENUE,
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeals from Decisions of the
United States Tax Court
Submitted September 26, 2017**
Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
In these consolidated appeals, Scott A. Whittington appeals pro se from the
Tax Court’s decision, after a bench trial, upholding the Commissioner of Internal
Revenue’s determination of income tax deficiencies and additions for tax years
2006 through 2011. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes these cases are suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Whittington’s requests for
oral argument, set forth in his opening and reply briefs, are denied.
review de novo the Tax Court’s legal conclusions and for clear error its factual
determinations. Hardy v. Comm’r, 181 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 1999). We
affirm.
The Tax Court properly upheld the Commissioner’s revised deficiency
determination because the Commissioner presented “some substantive evidence”
that Whittington failed to report income and Whittington did not submit any
relevant evidence “showing that the deficiency was arbitrary or erroneous.” Id. at
1004-05.
The Tax Court properly upheld the Commissioner’s additions to taxes for
Whittington’s failure to file a required tax return, to pay taxes as set forth in
substitute for returns, and to pay estimated taxes. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 6651(a)(1),
6651(a)(2), 6654(a); see also id. § 6020(b)(2) (any substitute for return “made and
subscribed by the Secretary shall be prima facie good and sufficient for all legal
purposes”); id. § 6651(g)(2) (any return made by the Secretary under § 6020(b)
“shall be treated as the return filed by the taxpayer for purposes of determining the
amount of the addition” under § 6651(a)(2)).
We reject as meritless Whittington’s contentions that the Tax Court erred in
relying on substitute for returns, admitting evidence, and that he was denied due
process.
AFFIRMED.
2 16-70199