Donald R. Cooley and Cathy A. Cooley - Page 16

                                       - 16 -                                         
                                     Discussion                                       
         The Deficiency Case at Docket No. 7464-00                                    
               The only issue we must decide in the case at docket No.                
         7464-002 is whether petitioner is liable for penalties for fraud             
         under section 6663(a)3 for the taxable years in issue.4                      

               2Petitioners contend on brief that certain alleged                     
         overpayments and credits should be applied against the income tax            
         deficiencies in the case at docket No. 7464-00.  Petitioners do              
         not otherwise challenge the income tax deficiencies determined by            
         respondent in the case at docket No. 7464-00.  We shall address              
         those contentions in the case at docket No. 9452-00L.  In the                
         petition for the case at docket No. 7464-00, petitioners alleged             
         that “said assessment is premised upon an overstatement of income            
         in taxpayers amended returns.”  Petitioners contend on brief that            
         certain alleged overpayments should be applied against the income            
         tax deficiencies in the case at docket No. 7464-00, including the            
         deficiency of $2,982.63 in 1989, $2,617.74 in 1990, $171.92 in               
         1991, and $3,007.91 in 1993.  Those deficiencies are distinct                
         from the sec. 6663(a) fraud penalties for petitioner’s 1989,                 
         1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993 tax years.                                        
               3Sec. 6663 provides:                                                   
               SEC. 6663.   IMPOSITION OF FRAUD PENALTY                               
                    (a) Imposition of Penalty.–If 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           
               75 percent of the portion of the underpayment which is                 
               attributable to fraud.                                                 
                    (b) Determination of Portion Attributable to Fraud.–If            
               the Secretary establishes that any portion of an                       
               underpayment is attributable to fraud, the entire                      
               underpayment shall be treated as attributable to fraud,                
               except with respect to any portion of the underpayment which           
               the taxpayer establishes (by a preponderance of the                    
               evidence) is not attributable to fraud.                                
                    (c) Special Rule for Joint Returns.-–In the case of a             
               joint return, this section shall not apply with respect to a           
               spouse unless some part of the underpayment is due to the              
                                                             (continued...)           




Page:  Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011