- 76 -- 76 -
2. Concession of the Deficiency
Petitioners argue that their concessions of the deficiencies
preclude imposition of the section 6659 additions to tax.
Petitioners contend that their concessions render any inquiry
into the grounds for such deficiencies moot. Absent such
inquiry, petitioners argue that it cannot be known if their
underpayments were attributable to a valuation overstatement or
other discrepancy. Without a finding that a valuation
overstatement contributed to an underpayment, according to
petitioners, section 6659 cannot apply. In support of this line
of reasoning, petitioners rely heavily upon Heasley v.
Commissioner, supra, and McCrary v. Commissioner, supra.
Petitioners' open-ended concessions do not obviate our
finding that the Partnership transactions lacked economic
substance due to overvaluation of the recyclers. This is not a
situation where we have "to decide difficult valuation questions
for no reason other than the application of penalties." See
McCrary v. Commissioner, supra at 854 n.14. The value of the
Sentinel EPE recycler was established in Provizer v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-177, and stipulated by the parties.
As a consequence of the inflated value assigned to the recyclers
by the Partnerships, petitioners claimed deductions and credits
that resulted in underpayments of tax, and we held that the
Partnership transactions lacked economic substance. Regardless
of petitioners' concessions, in these cases the underpayments of
Page: Previous 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011