- 8 -
spouse’s income in order for relief to be available. See sec.
6013(e)(4). Section 6013(e) did not, however, set forth any
particular procedures to be followed in seeking relief or any
explicit guidelines regarding the availability of judicial
review.
Taxpayers desiring to claim entitlement to the relief
afforded by section 6013(e) typically did so by asserting
innocent spouse status either in their initial petition to this
Court for redetermination of a deficiency or in an amendment to
such a petition. See Garvey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-
354; Himmelwright v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-114. The
issue would then be settled prior to trial or would remain a
contested question for judicial resolution. See Garvey v.
Commissioner, supra; Himmelwright v. Commissioner, supra. If the
tax liability had been paid before the mailing of a deficiency
notice and section 6013(e) was invoked as the basis for a refund,
this Court would have no jurisdiction over the issue, and the
matter would generally be decided in U.S. District Court. Cf.
sec. 6213(b)(4).
Against this statutory and procedural background, the
question of whether one spouse had a right to challenge by
litigation the Commissioner’s decision to grant relief to the
other spouse was answered in the negative. See Estate of Ravetti
v. United States, 37 F.3d 1393, 1395-1396 (9th Cir. 1994); Garvey
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011