- 3 -
The issues for decisions1 are: (1) Whether petitioners are
liable for additions to tax under section 6653(a)(1) and (2) for
negligence or intentional disregard of rules or regulations, and
(2) whether petitioners are liable for additions to tax under
section 6659 for underpayments of tax attributable to valuation
overstatements.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts have been stipulated, and they are so
found. The stipulated facts and attached exhibits are
incorporated herein by this reference. Petitioners Keith E. and
Marilyn B. West resided in Edina, Minnesota, at the time they
filed the petition in this case. Petitioners Warren S. and
Elizabeth A. West resided in Burnsville, Minnesota, at the time
they filed the petition in this case.
1 It would appear that petitioners have abandoned any
contention regarding the statute of limitations (the so-called
Davenport issue) in view of the affirmance of this Court’s
opinion on that issue by the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit. See Davenport Recycling Associates v. Commissioner, 220
F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2000), affg. T.C. Memo. 1998-347; see also
Klein v. United States, 86 F. Supp. 2d 690 (E.D. Mich. 1999);
Clark v. United States, 68 F. Supp. 2d 1333, 1342-1346 (N.D. Ga.
1999); Barlow v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-339; Kohn v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-150. However, if we are mistaken
in this regard, then we refer the parties to paragraphs 61-63 of
the supplemental stipulation of facts, and we decide the
Davenport issue in respondent’s favor based on the foregoing
precedent.
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