- 11 - gross income and petitioner's bank statements would have revealed that expenses exceeded reported adjusted gross income by almost 2 to 1. See Chandler v. Commissioner, supra; Tafolla v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-576. The record does not indicate that petitioner was prohibited from reviewing those documents or investigating the family finances, or that Mr. Muhn was deceitful about the family finances. See Cousins v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-129. Such an inquiry would have seemed appropriate given that the 1991 return was filed during Mr. Muhn's audit. Thus, we hold that petitioner is not entitled to innocent spouse relief with respect to the net income from PFA. 2. Inequities of Holding Petitioner Liable Assuming arguendo that petitioner did not know or did not have reason to know of the omitted income on the 1991 Federal income tax return, petitioner failed to meet her burden of proof with respect to the inequities of holding her liable for the deficiencies and additions to tax. Rule 142(a). In examining the inequity of holding petitioner liable, we focus on whether she received significant benefit from the omission of income, Estate of Krock v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 672, 677-678 (1989), and whether she was deserted, divorced, or separated, sec. 1.6013-5(b), Income Tax Regs. We may also consider whether petitioner will suffer undue hardship as a result of thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011