- 50 -
for certain days indicated NDV was not open during normal busi-
ness hours; and (8) Mr. Katerelos' testimony at trial was not
credible.
Although the additions to tax and the penalties for fraud
apply to the entire underpayment unless the taxpayer proves that
some portion of the underpayment is not due to fraud, respondent
determined, and does not argue otherwise herein, that only the
portion of the underpayment for each of the years 1987 through
1990 that is attributable to the underreporting of certain gross
receipts of NDV for each such year is due to fraud. Mr.
Katerelos has not shown either (1) that he underreported in
petitioners' returns for the years 1987 through 1990 the gross
receipts of NDV in any amounts other than the amounts by which
respondent contends that he underreported those gross receipts or
(2) that any portion of the underpayment for each of those years
that is attributable to that underreporting is not due to fraud.
Based on our examination of the entire record before us, we
find that respondent has established by clear and convincing
evidence that Mr. Katerelos intended to evade tax for each of the
years 1987 through 1990 that he knew to be owing by conduct
intended to conceal, mislead, or otherwise prevent the collection
of such taxes.
We find on the record before us that Mr. Katerelos is liable
for 1987 and 1988 for the additions to tax for fraud under
Page: Previous 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011