- 77 -- 77 -
tax were attributable to the valuation overstatements.
Moreover, concession of the investment tax credit in and of
itself does not relieve taxpayers of liability for the section
6659 addition to tax. See Dybsand v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1994-56; Chiechi v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-630. Instead,
the ground upon which the investment tax credit is disallowed or
conceded is significant. Dybsand v. Commissioner, supra. Even
in situations in which there are arguably two grounds to support
a deficiency and one supports a section 6659 addition to tax and
the other does not, the taxpayer may still be liable for the
addition to tax. Gainer v. Commissioner, 893 F.2d at 228; Irom
v. Commissioner, 866 F.2d 545, 547 (2d Cir. 1989), vacating in
part T.C. Memo. 1988-211; Harness v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1991-321.
In the present cases, no argument was made and no evidence
was presented to the Court to prove that disallowance and
concession of the claimed investment tax credits and other tax
benefits related to anything other than a valuation
overstatement. To the contrary, petitioners each stipulated
substantially the same facts concerning the Partnership
transactions as we found in Provizer v. Commissioner, supra. In
the Provizer case, we held that the taxpayers were liable for the
section 6659 addition to tax because the underpayment of taxes
was directly related to the overvaluation of the Sentinel EPE
recyclers. The overvaluation of the recyclers, exceeding 2325
Page: Previous 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011