- 9 -
extension shifts to respondent. See Mecom v. Commissioner,
101 T.C. 374, 382-383 (1993), affd. without published opinion,
40 F.3d 385 (5th Cir. 1994); Amesbury Apartments, Ltd. v.
Commissioner, 95 T.C. 227, 240-241 (1990). Respondent avers that
petitioner omitted from gross income an amount properly
includable therein in excess of 25 percent of the amount of gross
income stated on the return and, thus, respondent relies on the
provisions of section 6501(e)(1). Because we find that
petitioner omitted no gross income from the 1989 return, section
6501(e)(1) is of no avail to respondent.
III. Omission From Gross Income
A. Introduction
Petitioner reported gross income of $385,150 on the 1989
return. Twenty-five percent of $385,150 equals $96,288. Thus,
respondent must show that petitioner omitted gross income in
excess of $96,288. Respondent claims that petitioner was
required to report, but failed to report, two items of gross
income, viz, petitioner’s gains from the dispositions of (1) the
1987 Ampel notes and (2) the Holland Spring notes. In the
notice, respondent set forth adjustments increasing gross income
by a total of $17,248,184 on account of those two claimed
omissions, viz, $14,059,135 on account of the 1987 Ampel notes
and $3,189,049 on account of the Holland Spring notes. On brief,
respondent lowers his claim of unreported gross income with
respect to the 1987 Ampel notes to $10,522,422, for total
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011