Opinion ID: 707161
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Factual Basis for Enhancement

Text: 9 Next, Jyoti argues that there was no factual basis for the enhancement. Jyoti contends that the timing of the conversation with the tenant cannot be used to support the obstruction enhancement because it occurred before the criminal investigation. There is, however, no reason to distinguish a civil audit from the subsequent overlapping criminal investigation. See United States v. LaSalle Nat'l Bank, 437 U.S. 298, 314 (1978). 10 The district court found that Ashok obstructed justice by submitting false documents to the IRS auditor to substantiate the deduction found on the returns in question. Ashok argues that the use of the documents constitutes double counting as it is an element of the offense. We disagree. Tax evasion is a completed offense at the time of filing. Sansone v. United States, 380 U.S. 343, 354 (1965). Thus, the false documents submitted during the audit after the filing of the returns were not part of the offense to which Ashok pleaded guilty.