-30-
For purposes of the instant case, “underpayment” is the same as
“deficiency”. Compare sec. 6664(a) with sec. 6211(a).
Broadly speaking, for purposes of this provision, negligence
is lack of due care or failure to do what a reasonable and
ordinarily prudent person would do under the circumstances to
determine that person’s income tax liability. ASAT, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 108 T.C. 147, 175 (1997); Cluck v. Commissioner,
105 T.C. 324, 339 (1995). Reasonable and good faith reliance by
a taxpayer on an accountant or attorney may be sufficient to
avoid the addition to tax for negligence. See United States v.
Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 251 (1985). Petitioner has the burden of
proving error in respondent’s determination that these additions
to tax should be imposed against him. Little v. Commissioner,
106 F.3d 1445, 1449-1450 (9th Cir. 1997), affg. T.C. Memo. 1993-
281; Korshin v. Commissioner, 91 F.3d 670, 671 (4th Cir. 1996),
affg. T.C. Memo. 1995-46; ASAT, Inc. v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. at
175.
Petitioner was in the witness box for about 2� hours. On
the basis of our observation, as well as the record in the
instant case, we conclude that petitioner is an articulate and
able man of integrity. He makes up his mind on the basis of the
information he has. If he feels the need for additional
information, or advice, or instruction, then he seeks it. If he
feels that no further information, advice, or instruction is
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011