J. David Golub - Page 34




                                        - 34 -                                         

               On the basis of this record, we conclude that petitioner is             
          liable for accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a).  In             
          1991, he failed to report substantial amounts of income.  In 1991            
          and 1992, he claimed deductions to which he was not entitled.  He            
          failed to provide any reasonable explanation or any credible                 
          evidence to substantiate his entitlement to the deductions.  He              
          has not shown that there was reasonable cause for any portion of             
          the resulting underpayment, or that he acted in good faith.                  
          Petitioner’s actions were not those of a reasonable and prudent              
          person under the circumstances.  Accordingly, petitioner is                  
          liable for accuracy-related penalties under section 6662(a) for              
          1991 and 1992.                                                               
          VII.  Penalty Under Section 6673                                             
               Respondent seeks imposition of a penalty under section 6673.            
          Section 6673(a)(1) allows this Court to award a penalty not in               
          excess of $25,000 when proceedings have been instituted or                   
          maintained primarily for delay, or where the taxpayer’s position             
          is frivolous or groundless or if it is contrary to established               
          law and unsupported by a reasoned, colorable argument for a                  
          change in the law.  See Coleman v. Commissioner, 791 F.2d 68, 71             
          (7th Cir. 1986); Kish v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-16;                   
          Talmage v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-114, affd. without                  
          published opinion 101 F.3d 695 (4th Cir. 1996).  In our opinion,             







Page:  Previous  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011