- 3 - to petitioner and Mrs. Berry consistent with the terms of a settlement agreement that they had previously executed on March 17, 1997. Petitioner claimed a deduction in the amount of $220,000 for alimony on his Federal income tax return for 1996. Respondent subsequently issued a notice of deficiency determining a $62,811 deficiency in petitioner’s income tax for 1996. The deficiency is based in substantial part on respondent’s disallowance of $154,000 of the $220,000 deduction for alimony claimed by petitioner. Petitioner filed a timely petition with the Court challenging the notice of deficiency. After respondent filed an answer to the petition, petitioner filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment seeking a summary adjudication that his payment of $154,000 of Mrs. Berry’s attorney’s fees pursuant to the State court’s August 28, 1996, order constituted alimony within the meaning of section 71 that is deductible under section 215. Respondent filed an objection to petitioner’s motion, to which petitioner filed a reply. This matter was called for hearing at the Court’s motions session in Washington, D.C. Counsel for respondent appeared at the hearing and made an oral Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment that petitioner’s payment of Mrs. Berry’s attorney’s fees does not constitute alimony within the meaning of section 71. Although no appearance was made by or on behalf ofPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011