- 25 -
witness, neither brother, daughter, nor friend, to the courtroom
to corroborate his story that he was holding these funds for
them. In failing to do so, petitioner did not carry his burden
of proving that these funds belonged to other taxpayers. By
reason of the evidence in the record that the alternate payees
did not report these amounts on their income tax returns, and
that petitioner exercised dominion and control over these amounts
when they were deposited in Mrs. Hernandez’ bank account,
Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426, 431 (1955)
(“undeniable accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over
which the taxpayers have complete dominion”), we sustain in its
entirety respondent’s adjustment to petitioner’s income for each
year in question.
Issue 5. Petitioner Is Liable for the Accuracy-Related Penalty
Under Section 6662(d) for Substantial Understatements of Income
Tax
Section 6662(a) provides for an accuracy-related penalty of
20 percent “of the portion of the underpayment to which this
section applies”, which is “the portion of any underpayment which
is attributable to * * * Any substantial understatement of
income tax.” Sec. 6662(b)(2).12 Section 6662(d) defines a
12 For purposes of sec. 6662, sec. 6664(a) provides that an
underpayment is
the amount by which any tax imposed by this title
exceeds the excess of--
(1) the sum of--
(continued...)
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011