Haralampos Katerelos and Irene Katerelos - Page 34

                                                 - 34 -                                                   

            we did not find him credible.  In addition, we found that Mr.                                 
            Katerelos had a selective memory and that he was evasive when                                 
            answering questions posed by counsel for respondent.  Under such                              
            circumstances, we are not required to, and generally do not, rely                             
            on the testimony of Mr. Katerelos.  Geiger v. Commissioner, 440                               
            F.2d 688, 689-690 (9th Cir. 1971), affg. per curiam T.C. Memo.                                
            1969-159; Wood v. Commissioner, 338 F.2d 602, 605 (9th Cir.                                   
            1964), affg. 41 T.C. 593 (1964); Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87                                 
            T.C. 74, 77 (1986); Hradesky v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 87, 90                                  
            (1975), affd. per curiam 540 F.2d 821 (5th Cir. 1976).                                        
            Issues As to Which Respondent Has the Burden of Proof                                         
                  Additions to Tax and Penalties for Fraud                                                
                  Respondent determined that Mr. Katerelos is liable for 1987                             
            and 1988 for the additions to tax under section 6653(b)(1) and                                
            for 1989 and 1990 for the penalties under section 6663(a) on the                              
            portion of the underpayment attributable to the underreporting of                             
            certain gross receipts of NDV.28  Respondent concedes that Ms.                                
            Katerelos is not liable for any of the years 1987 through 1990                                
            for any additions to tax or penalties for fraud.29                                            

            28  Respondent determined in the notice that $18,151, $10,918,                                
            and $21,997 of the total underpayment for each of the years 1988                              
            through 1990, respectively, was due to fraud.  Respondent did not                             
            determine that petitioners are liable for the additions to tax                                
            and penalties for fraud on that portion of the underpayment for                               
            each of those years that was not attributable to the under-                                   
            reporting of certain gross receipts of NDV.                                                   
            29  Petitioners argue that, because fraud cannot be imputed from                              
            one spouse to another and because respondent concedes that Ms.                                
                                                                            (continued...)                


Page:  Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011