DocketNumber: Docket No. 2509-79.
Citation Numbers: 42 T.C.M. 579, 1981 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 335, 1981 T.C. Memo. 406
Filed Date: 8/6/1981
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/20/2020
Held: Petitioner's conviction under
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
IRWIN,
BACKGROUND
Respondent issued the *336 notice of deficiency in this case on November 28, 1978, and petitioner timely filed a petition for redetermination with this Court. Mr. Brown was a resident of Baton Rouge, Louisiana, at the time he filed his petition.
On April 30, 1979, respondent filed an answer wherein, inter alia, he argued that the doctrine of collateral estoppel was applicable in the instant action because of petitioner's criminal conviction under
On February 20, 1980, this Court granted petitioner's unopposed motion for continuance. The basis for petitioner's motion was that because an appeal *337 in the criminal case was pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, a postponement of the civil tax suit might dispose of the collateral estoppel issue and possibly result in settlement. 3
On January 14, 1981, respondent filed with this Court a "Motion for Partial Summary Judgment" pursuant to
(1) That petitioner is estopped under the doctrine of collateral estoppel (estoppel by judgment) from denying that he filed false and fraudulent individual income tax returns for the taxable years 1974 and 1975 and from denying that he received substantial additional income during 1974 and 1975 from Dixie Brewing Company and Falstaff Brewing Corporation which was omitted from petitioner's returns in each of these years; and
(2) That by reason of the above petitioner is liable for the addition to tax under
At the hearing on respondent's motion scheduled for June 1, 1981, petitioner submitted to the Court a document styled "Memorandum of Authorities Concerning Respondent's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment" in lieu of oral argument. Respondent subsequently declined to file a reply memorandum.
FINDING OF FACTS
On February 16, 1977, petitioner was indicted for violation of
COUNT I
That on or about April 15, 1975, in the Middle District of Louisiana, GEORGE F. BROWN, did willfully and knowingly make and subscribe a United States Individual Income Tax Return, Form 1040, for the calendar year 1974, which was verified by a written declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury and was filed with the Internal Revenue Service, which said income tax return he did not believe to be true and correct as to every material matter in that the said return reported adjusted gross income in the amount of $ 37,088.14, whereas, as GEORGE F. BROWN then and there well knew and believed, he received substantial additional income during calendar year 1974, which included approximately $ 15,000 received from the Dixie Brewing Company, through its officers and employees, which was not reported as part of the adjusted gross income on the said income tax return; all in violation of Title
COUNT II
That on or about June 10, 1976, in the Middle District of Louisiana, GEORGE F. BROWN, did willfully and knowingly make and subscribe a United States Individual Income Tax *340 Return, Form 1040, for the calendar year 1975, which was verified by a written declaration that it was made under the penalties of perjury and was filed with the Internal Revenue Service, which said income tax return he did not believe to be true and correct as to every material matter in that the said return reported adjusted gross income in the amount of $ 31,760.12, whereas, as GEORGE F. BROWN then and there well knew and believed, he received substantial additional income during calendar year 1975, which included approximately $ 15,000 received from the Falstaff Brewing Corporation, through its officers and employees, which was not reported as part of the adjusted gross income on the said income tax return; all in violation of Title
On June 15, 1977, petitioner was convicted by a jury on both counts of the indictment. All appeals have been exhausted and the judgment is now final. Petitioner herein is the same person who was the defendant in that case, and the respondent herein is a party in privity with the United States of America, the prosecuting party.
OPINION
Respondent asks us for a partial summary adjudication pursuant to
[i]f any part of any underpayment * * * of tax required to be shown on a return is due to fraud, there shall be added to the tax an amount equal to 50 percent of the underpayment.
Unlike the deficiency itself, the burden of proving the applicability of the addition to tax for fraud for each taxable year rests on the respondent. Such burden must be met by clear and convincing evidence.
Petitioner was convicted by a jury of violating
In
As in
1. All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended and in effect for the taxable years at issue. ↩
2. Unless otherwise indicated, any reference to "Rules" shall be deemed to refer to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.↩
3. Petitioner has conceded that the conviction is now final.↩
4. Respondent's Answer contended that collateral estoppel also applied to prevent petitioner from denying that he "received as income the $ 15,000 payment from Mr. Janneck [of Dixie Brewing Company] in 1974 and the $ 15,000 payment from Mr. Gregg [of Falstaff Brewing Corporation] in 1975 which amounts were not reported as income on petitioner's income tax returns." This assertion does not appear in respondent's motion for partial summary judgment and we note that the indictment under which petitioner was convicted charges only that he "received substantial additional income * * * which included
5. Under
6.
Any person who--
(1) Declaration under penalties of perjury.-- Willfully makes and subscribes any return, statement, or other document, which contains or is verified by a written declaration that it is made under the penalties of perjury, and which he does not believe to be true and correct as to every material matter.
shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $ 5,000, or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. ↩
7. In
8. In
9. In
Mitchell v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , 118 F.2d 308 ( 1941 )
United States v. George F. Brown , 628 F.2d 471 ( 1980 )
United States v. George F. Brown , 574 F.2d 1274 ( 1978 )
United States v. Bishop , 93 S. Ct. 2008 ( 1973 )
Commissioner v. Sunnen , 68 S. Ct. 715 ( 1948 )