- 153 -
Nor are we persuaded by clear and convincing evidence that
petitioner’s actions of failing to cooperate with respondent’s
agents and his lack of credibility in certain of his dealings
with those agents, as well as with the Court, were attributable
to petitioner’s fraudulent intent to evade tax when he filed the
joint return for each of the years at issue, as opposed to his
desire to conceal his negligence and his disregard of tax rules
and regulations. Based on our examination of the entire record
before us, we find that respondent has failed to carry respon-
dent’s burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence
that petitioner intended to evade tax for each of the years at
issue, which he believed to be owing, by conduct intended to
conceal, mislead, or otherwise prevent the collection of such
tax.
On the record before us, we find that petitioner is not
liable for any of the years at issue for the fraud penalty under
section 6663(a).
Accuracy-Related Penalty Under Section 6662(a)
Respondent determined in the alternative to the fraud
penalty under section 6663(a) that petitioner is liable for each
of the years at issue for the accuracy-related penalty under
section 6662(a) because of negligence or disregard of rules or
regulations under section 6662(b)(1).
Section 6662(a) imposes an accuracy-related penalty equal to
20 percent of the underpayment resulting from, inter alia,
negligence or disregard of rules or regulations. Sec.
Page: Previous 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011