- 200 -
other adviser gave advice to BOT regarding its withholding obli-
gations with respect to the Horbury transaction. Thus, the
instant cases are distinguishable from Coldwater Seafood Corp. v.
Commissioner, 69 T.C. 966 (1978), and Aiken Indus., Inc. v.
Commissioner, 56 T.C. at 936, on which petitioner relies.
Based upon our examination of the entire record in these
cases, we find that, to the extent we have sustained respondent's
determinations with respect to the withholding tax obligations of
Radcliffe and BOT, petitioner has failed to carry his burden of
showing that respondent erred in determining that Radcliffe and
BOT are liable for the additions to tax and penalties that she
imposed in respect of such obligations. Accordingly, we sustain
respondent's determinations with respect to the liability of
Radcliffe and BOT for (1) the additions to tax provided under
section 6651(a) for failure to file timely withholding tax re-
turns with respect to the amounts required to be shown as tax in
such returns that result from this Opinion, (2) the additions to
tax provided under section 6653(a) for negligence and/or dis-
regard of rules or regulations with respect to the underpayments,
as defined in section 6653(c), that result from this Opinion, and
(3) the penalties provided under section 6656(a) for failure to
make timely deposits with respect to the underpayments, as de-
fined in section 6656(a), that result from this Opinion. We also
sustain respondent's determinations that petitioner, as trans-
Page: Previous 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011