husband's activities at the time she signed the
return does not change the result. We will not
infer intent to evade tax from her passive
knowledge. [Congelliere v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1990-265.]
In Congelliere, moreover, the wife clearly had actual
knowledge of her husband's activities when the tax return
was signed, since her husband had already been arrested for
drug trafficking. Although she was denied innocent spouse
relief, the Court held that the wife was not liable for
fraud.
The cash was found in various parts of the house, $23,850
in the playroom closet, $2,652 in the dining room, $26,917
in the master bedroom, and $136,000 in the basement closet.
The agents and police
Despite the fact none of the insurance proceeds were used
toward renovating petitioners' home, petitioners managed to
renovate their home using other funds.
A portion of the total the purchase price for the property
was designated for the real estate and part was designated
for a business to be operated at the property. [S54]
[T201-202]
On December 19, 1988, an order of forfeiture was
issued in Mr. DiMichele's criminal case. The order called
for the seizure of all of Mr. DiMichele's assets.
Following the District Court's Order of Forfeiture,
petitioner filed a Forfeiture Claim on February 17, 1989,
which declared ownership in all jointly and individually
held bank accounts, all real estate listed, other than that
claimed by Mr. DiMichele's counsel, and jewelry worth at
least $91,287 (based on petitioner's appraisal). [Ex.19]
In the District Court's Final Order of Forfeiture on
January 24, 1990, jewelry worth an appraised value of
$40,120 (based on petitioner's appraisal) was returned to
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011