                   T.C. Summary Opinion 2002-17



                      UNITED STATES TAX COURT



                DIANE MARIE MURDOCH, Petitioner v.
           COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent


     Docket No. 10260-00S.               February 27, 2002.


     Diane Marie Murdoch, pro se.

     David R. Jojola, for respondent.



     COUVILLION, Special Trial Judge:   This case was heard

pursuant to section 7463 in effect at the time the petition was

filed.1   The decision to be entered is not reviewable by any

other court, and this opinion should not be cited as authority.




     1
          Unless otherwise indicated, subsequent section
references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the
years at issue.
                                  - 2 -


      Respondent, in a notice of deficiency, determined against

petitioner the following deficiencies in Federal income taxes and

additions to tax for the years indicated:


                                          Addition to Tax
         Year        Deficiency           Sec. 6651(a)(1)

         1994          $3,154                $388.00
         1995           3,116                 419.00
         1996           2,486                 390.75
         1998           2,359                 304.25


      In a written stipulation filed by the parties, petitioner

conceded all the adjustments in the notice of deficiency, except

the additions to tax under section 6651(a)(1).     The parties

further stipulated that, in addition to the section 6651(a)(1)

issue, the remaining issue was whether petitioner was entitled to

deductions for trade or business expenses incurred in a dog

breeding activity.   Accordingly, the stipulated facts are so

found, along with the exhibits annexed thereto.     At the time the

petition was filed, petitioner's legal residence was Riverside,

California.

      At the time this case was called from the calendar at the

opening of the trial session, petitioner appeared.     At that time,

she and counsel for respondent executed the stipulation referred

to.   However, petitioner failed to appear at the time scheduled

for trial of her case.   The sole evidence presented to the Court

in support of petitioner's case is the stipulation referred to
                                - 3 -


above.    Accordingly, the Court decides the merits of petitioner's

case on such record.    As noted above, petitioner conceded all the

adjustments in the notice of deficiency, except for the section

6651(a)(1) addition to tax.    Having made such a concession, and

with no evidence having been presented to show that petitioner

would not be liable for the resulting deficiencies in tax, the

Court sustains respondent on the deficiencies in tax determined

in the notice of deficiency.

     The first issue is whether petitioner is liable for the

addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1).    Section 6651(a)(1)

provides for an addition to tax for failure to file a return

timely, unless the failure is due to reasonable cause and not due

to willful neglect.    Under section 6072, income tax returns must

be filed on or before the 15th day of April following the close

of the taxable year, subject to exceptions not pertinent here.

In the stipulation, petitioner agreed that she did not file any

Federal income tax returns for the years 1994, 1995, 1996, and

1998.    The stipulation does not provide any reason for which

petitioner failed to file returns for these years.    Respondent,

therefore, is sustained on this issue.

     The next issue is petitioner's claim to deductions for trade

or business expenses incurred in a dog breeding activity.    No

evidence was presented at trial with respect to this issue, nor

does the stipulation of facts contain any factual information
                              - 4 -


regarding this claimed activity.   Since petitioner did not file

tax returns for the years at issue, and since there is no factual

agreement in the stipulation with regard to this activity, the

Court holds that petitioner is not entitled to deductions for a

trade or business activity for any of the years at issue.

Respondent is sustained on this issue.

     Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case

Division.




                                           Decision will be entered

                                      for respondent.
