Brenda J. Clarrk - Page 3

                                        - 2 -                                         
               In a notice of deficiency to petitioner and her former                 
          spouse, James B. Clark (Mr. Clark), respondent determined income            
          tax deficiencies, an addition to tax, and penalties as follows:             

          Addition to Tax    Penalty                                                  
               Year     Deficiency      Sec. 6651(a)(1)  Sec. 6662(a)                 
          1998      $ 7,494            $776.75       $1,498.80                        
          2000       14,163               --          2,832.60                        
          2001        5,754               --          1,150.80                        

               The sole issue for decision is whether, under section 6015,            
          petitioner is entitled to relief from joint liability for the               
          above deficiencies, addition to tax, and penalties.                         
               Some of the facts were stipulated.  Those facts, with the              
          exhibits annexed thereto, are so found and are made part hereof.            
          Petitioner’s legal residence at the time the petition was filed             
          was West Valley City, Utah.                                                 
               During the years at issue, petitioner was married to Mr.               
          Clark.  The two filed joint Federal income tax returns for 1998,            
          2000, and 2001.  Petitioner and Mr. Clark were divorced on                  
          September 26, 2003.  On March 1, 2004, respondent issued a notice           
          of deficiency jointly to petitioner and Mr. Clark in which the              
          above deficiencies, addition to tax, and penalties were                     
          determined.  Mr. Clark filed a petition with this Court, in his             
          own behalf, for a redetermination of the adjustments in the                 
          notice of deficiency.  That case proceeded to trial, and the                
          Court sustained respondent on all determinations in the notice of           





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011