- 15 -
The taxpayer has the burden of proving that he or she meets
each of these requirements. Feldman v. Commissioner, 20 F.3d
1128, 1134-1135 (11th Cir. 1994), affg. T.C. Memo. 1993-17;
Stevens v. Commissioner, 872 F.2d 1499, 1504 (11th Cir. 1989),
affg. T.C. Memo. 1988-63. A failure to prove any one of these
requirements will prevent the taxpayer from qualifying for
relief. Feldman v. Commissioner, supra; Stevens v. Commissioner;
supra; Bokum v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 126, 138 (1990), affd. 992
F.2d 1132 (11th Cir. 1993).
The parties now agree that petitioner filed joint returns
with Mr. Womack for 1989 and 1990.6 We now consider the other
requirements for innocent spouse relief.
Substantial Understatement Attributable to Grossly Erroneous
Items of the Other Spouse
Items Attributable to Mr. Womack
The deficiencies in this case stem from unreported income
and disallowed Schedule C expenses. The remaining items in the
notice of deficiency either decrease income or, being
computational in nature, derive from the above adjustments. The
6 At the calendar call, petitioner filed a motion to dismiss
as to taxable year 1990 for lack of jurisdiction or, in the
alternative, for leave to file amended petition. In support of
this motion, petitioner alleged that petitioner's signature on
the 1990 return was forged and that, therefore, the 1990 return
was not a joint return. The Court denied the motion for
dismissal and granted the motion for leave to file an amended
petition to include this alternative. Petitioner has now
abandoned this alternative position, acknowledging in her opening
brief that the parties agree that joint returns were filed in
1989 and 1990.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011