Olde Raleigh Realty Corporation - Page 18




                                       - 17 -                                         
          accuracy-related penalties for 1995 and 1996.  Section 6662(a)              
          imposes an accuracy-related penalty in the amount of 20 percent             
          of the portion of an underpayment of tax attributable to                    
          negligence or disregard of rules or regulations.  Negligence is             
          any failure to make a reasonable attempt to comply with the                 
          provisions of the internal revenue laws or to keep adequate books           
          and records or to substantiate items properly.  Sec. 6662(c);               
          sec. 1.6662-3(b)(1), Income Tax Regs.  Moreover, negligence is              
          the failure to exercise due care or the failure to do what a                
          reasonable and prudent person would do under the circumstances.             
          Neely v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 934, 947 (1985).  Disregard                  
          includes any careless, reckless, or intentional disregard of                
          rules or regulations.  Sec. 6662(c); sec. 1.6662-3(b)(2), Income            
          Tax Regs.  No penalty will be imposed with respect to any portion           
          of any underpayment if it is shown that there was a reasonable              
          cause for such portion and that the taxpayer acted in good faith            
          with respect to such portion.  Sec. 6664(c).  This determination            
          is based on all the facts and circumstances.  Sec. 1.6664-                  
          4(b)(1), Income Tax Regs.                                                   
               Petitioner presented no evidence regarding the section                 
          6662(a) accuracy-related penalties.  Petitioner failed to keep              
          adequate records necessary to document the alleged loan                     
          transactions.  Nor did petitioner provide other evidence to                 
          substantiate the alleged loan transactions.  Petitioner failed to           






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011