- 14 -
Petitioner signed two powers of attorney granting Mr. Silver's
accounting firm the authority to represent her for purposes of
respondent's audit. Moreover, through her original attorney,
petitioner maintained in the petition, and until shortly before
trial in this case, that the returns were jointly filed.13 See
supra pp. 6-7.
Petitioner's reliance on our opinion in Lomanno v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-426, granting the taxpayer's motion
for an award of attorney's fees and litigation costs, is
misplaced. In Lomanno, we determined that the taxpayer had
exhausted her administrative remedies, despite the fact that no
Appeals conference was held. However, in contrast to the instant
case, the taxpayer in Lomanno never received a 30-day letter. As
a result, we concluded that section 301.7430-1(e), Proced. &
Admin. Regs., "would allow * * * [her] to be excepted from having
to participate in a prepetition appeals office conference."
Lomanno v. Commissioner, supra.14 In addition, we found that
13Respondent is not required to question and investigate the
authenticity of every return signature. Sec. 6064 provides that
"The fact that an individual's name is signed to a return,
statement, or other document shall be prima facie evidence for
all purposes that the return, statement, or other document was
actually signed by him."
14Pursuant to sec. 301.7430-1(e)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs.,
in the case of a petition in the Tax Court, a party's
administrative remedies shall be deemed to be exhausted if:
(i) The party did not receive a notice of proposed
deficiency (30-day letter) prior to the issuance of the
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011