- 9 -
petitioners now contend that they should be relieved of the
additions to tax for negligence because respondent has a duty to
afford substantially equal treatment to similarly situated
taxpayers. Petitioners further contend that respondent breached
his duty when he failed to offer them the so-called standard
settlement offer that was made available to other taxpayers.
Petitioner asserts that he was first made aware of the standard
settlement offer sometime during middle or late 1999 and that he
would have accepted the standard settlement offer if he had
received it. At trial, petitioner failed to present evidence
that demonstrates that he or his counsel attempted to settle the
case. Instead, petitioner conceded that he never attempted to
settle with respondent.
On March 8, 2000, the parties filed an amended Stipulation
of Settled Issues. In this stipulation, petitioners concede that
they are liable for the addition to tax under section 6659 for
1981. Petitioners also concede that section 6501 does not bar
the assessments for 1978 and 1979. At trial, petitioners also
conceded that their only challenge to the additions to tax for
negligence under section 6653 is their present argument that they
were denied equal treatment.
Consents To Extend Period of Limitations
On their 1981 Federal income tax return, petitioners listed
their address as “C/O Stuart Becker & Co. 665 Fifth Ave., New
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011