Opinion
28561-21SL
10-05-2022
GRAY ROBERT STEPHENS, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER AND DECISION
PETER J. PANUTHOS SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE
On July 29, 2022 respondent filed with the Court a Motion for Summary Judgment, together with a Settlement Officer's Declaration in Support of Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment. By Order dated August 8, 2022, petitioner was provided an opportunity to respond to respondent's motion. Petitioner did not respond to the Court's August 8, 2022 Order. On September 26, 2022, this case was called and recalled from the calendar for the Trial Session of the Court at Washington, DC. Petitioner and counsel for respondent appeared and were heard on the motion.
Rule 121 permits this Court to grant a motion for summary judgment and to issue a summary decision if the pleadings, and any other acceptable materials, together with the affidavits or declarations, if any, show that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that a decision may be rendered as a matter of law. Petitioner has failed to show that there is a genuine dispute as to a material fact in this case and it appears that respondent is entitled to a decision as a matter of law. We will grant respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment for the reasons stated in that motion and for cause more fully appearing in the transcript of the proceeding.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted. It is further
ORDERED and DECIDED that the proposed collection action in the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/or 6330, issued to petitioner on August 10, 2021, with respect to petitioner's taxable year 2018, upon which this case is based, is sustained.