- 65 -
it and there is no direct evidence of any abuse of administrative
discretion. Haught v. Commissioner, supra; cf. Wynn v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-609; Klieger v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1992-734.
However, we do not decide this issue solely on petitioners'
failure timely to request waivers, but instead we have considered
the issue on its merits. Petitioners urge that they relied on
Alter and Feinstein in deciding on the valuation claimed on their
tax returns. Petitioners contend that such reliance was
reasonable, and, therefore, that respondent should have waived
the section 6659 additions to tax.21 However, as we explained
above in finding petitioners liable for the negligence additions
to tax, petitioners' purported reliance on Alter and Feinstein
under the circumstances here was not reasonable.
Neither Alter nor Feinstein had any education or experience
in plastics materials or plastics recycling. They did not visit
PI or see a Sentinel EPE recycler or any competing machines in
their review of the transactions. Alter acknowledged that he had
no competence to confirm the value of the Sentinel EPE recycler
or to conduct a comparison, and he and Feinstein ultimately
21 In their posttrial briefs, petitioners referenced the
reports prepared by Carmagnola in support of the reasonableness
of the claimed valuations. For reasons discussed supra, we
consider the reports prepared by Carmagnola to be unreliable and
of no consequence.
Page: Previous 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011