- 31 -- 31 -
relied heavily upon the overvaluation of the Sentinel EPE
recyclers.
Although petitioners have not agreed to be bound by the
Provizer opinion, they have stipulated that the investments in
the Sentinel EPE recyclers in these cases are similar to the
investment described in Provizer v. Commissioner, supra. The
underlying transactions in these consolidated cases, and the
Sentinel EPE recyclers considered in these cases, are the same
type of transaction and same type of machines considered in
Provizer v. Commissioner, supra.
Based on the entire records in these cases, including the
extensive stipulations, testimony of respondent's experts, and
petitioners' testimony, we hold that each of the Partnership
transactions herein was a sham and lacked economic substance. In
reaching this conclusion, we rely heavily upon the overvaluation
of the Sentinel EPE recyclers. Respondent is sustained on the
question of the underlying deficiencies. We note that
petitioners have explicitly conceded this issue in the respective
stipulations of settled issues filed shortly before trial. The
records plainly support respondent's determinations regardless of
such concessions. For a detailed discussion of the facts and the
applicable law in a substantially identical case, see Provizer v.
Commissioner, supra.
A. Section 6653(a)--Negligence
In notices of deficiency, respondent determined that each of
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011