- 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 totalPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011