- 7 -
(1) The Form 1040X was signed by both petitioner and Mr. Mischel;
(2) the Form 1040X claimed one additional exemption (for Mr.
Mischel); and (3) the Form 1040X claimed the standard deduction
in an amount appropriate to a joint return. Petitioner never
filed the Form 1040X with respondent.3
E. Respondent's Determination
By notice of deficiency issued August 25, 1995, respondent
determined that petitioner received income from wages in the
total amount of $19,253 in 1992. Respondent also determined that
petitioner did not file an income tax return for 1992 and is
therefore liable for the addition to tax under section
6651(a)(1).
In determining the amount of the deficiency in income tax,
respondent: (1) Treated petitioner as married; (2) allowed
petitioner the standard deduction in an amount appropriate to a
married person filing separately; (3) applied the tax rates
applicable to that filing status; (4) allowed petitioner an
exemption for herself; and (5) did not allow any dependency
exemptions or the earned income credit. Further, in determining
the amount of the deficiency, respondent did not make any
allowance for the community property laws of the State of
Arizona.
3 At trial, Mr. Mischel testified that "we do not regard
the IRS as having any jurisdiction over [petitioner's] 1992 taxes
at this particular time, until the Court releases the
jurisdiction back to the IRS."
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011