spouse who turns a blind eye to whether there is a
substantial understatement of tax on a joint return.
Bokum v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. at 148.
For the reasons discussed above, we find that
petitioner does not meet the requirements of section
6013(e)(1)(C). Accordingly, petitioner is not entitled
to the relief provided by section 6013. It is unnecessary
for us to consider petitioner's arguments under section
6013(e)(1)(D).
Additions to Tax for Fraud
Respondent determined that Mr. DiMichele is liable
for the additions to tax for fraud pursuant to section
6653(b)(1) and (2) with respect to the underpayment of tax
for 1985. However, as mentioned above, respondent does not
allege fraud by petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner is not
liable for the additions to tax for fraud determined by
respondent with respect to petitioner's joint return for
1985.
For the foregoing reasons,
Decisions will be entered
for respondent, except as to
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011