- 31 -
notice of deficiency was mailed on July 21, 1989, well before the
expiration of the extended limitations period. The Davids have
presented no evidence that the Forms 872 were not properly
executed. Accordingly, the notice of deficiency in docket No.
24512-89 was issued within the statutory limitations period, as
extended by the parties, and the assessment in docket No. 24512-
89 is not barred by the statute of limitations.
We note that in their respective petitions, the Selvins and
the Zenkels also claimed that the notices of deficiency issued in
their cases were barred by the statute of limitations. However,
the Selvins conceded the issue at a call of the calendar on
March 21, 1994, and the Zenkels conceded the issue in the
stipulation of facts filed in their case. Blount never raised a
statute of limitations issue.
B. Section 6653(a)--Negligence
Respondent determined that petitioners are liable for
additions to tax for negligence under section 6653(a)(1) and (2).
Petitioners have the burden of proving that respondent's
determinations of these additions to tax are erroneous. Rule
142(a); Luman v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 846, 860-861 (1982).
Section 6653(a)(1) imposes an addition to tax equal to 5
percent of the underpayment if any part of an underpayment of tax
is due to negligence or intentional disregard of rules or
regulations. Section 6653(a)(2) imposes an addition to tax equal
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011