- 11 -
Q How did you think your tax liability arose?
A I was told that the first year of this post
office deal was not going to be allowed but that
Schulman was working it out and it would be taken care
of. * * *
Q And then later you learned that in fact some
liability had been determined?
A Yes.
Q Do you have any idea how it got from a maybe to
a this is it?
A No.
Thus, Ms. Levin's testimony indicates that she relied on
Mr. Levin's assurance that the tax dispute arising out of
petitioners' Schulman investment "was being taken care of." Our
interpretation of her testimony is that she implicitly authorized
him to take appropriate steps, which included, through
professional agents, the petition in this case.
In support of her motion, Ms. Levin relies on Abeles v.
Commissioner, 90 T.C. 103 (1988); Levitt v. Commissioner, 97 T.C.
437 (1991) (Levitt I); and Levitt v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1993-294 (Levitt II). In Abeles, however, the taxpayers were in
the process of divorce around the time that the notice of
deficiency was mailed and the petition and amended petition were
filed. Mrs. Abeles was unaware of the tax dispute until her bank
accounts were levied and a lien was placed on her residence.
In Levitt I, no decision had been entered at the time that
Mrs. Levitt asserted her husband's lack of authority to file a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011