David and Shirley Singer - Page 48

                                       - 48 -                                         
          recycler was established in Provizer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.            
          1992-177, and stipulated by the parties.  As a consequence of the           
          inflated value assigned to the recyclers by Plymouth, petitioners           
          claimed an operating loss deduction and credits that resulted in            
          an underpayment of tax, and we held that the Plymouth transaction           
          lacked economic substance.  Regardless of petitioners'                      
          concession, in this case the underpayment of tax was attributable           
          to the valuation overstatement.                                             
               Moreover, concession of the investment tax credit in and of            
          itself does not relieve taxpayers of liability for the section              
          6659 addition to tax.  See Dybsand v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.              
          1994-56; Chiechi v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-630.  Instead,            
          the ground upon which the investment tax credit is disallowed or            
          conceded is significant.  Dybsand v. Commissioner, supra.  Even             
          in situations in which there are arguably two grounds to support            
          a deficiency and one supports a section 6659 addition to tax and            
          the other does not, the taxpayer may still be liable for the                
          addition to tax.  Gainer v. Commissioner, 893 F.2d at 228; Irom             
          v. Commissioner, 866 F.2d 545, 547 (2d Cir. 1989), vacating in              
          part T.C. Memo. 1988-211; Harness v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.               
          1991-321.                                                                   
               In the present case, no argument was made and no evidence              
          was presented to the Court to prove that disallowance and                   
          concession of the claimed investment tax credits and other tax              
          benefits related to anything other than a valuation                         




Page:  Previous  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011