- 5 -
several liability under section 6015 with respect to
petitioners' 1993 return.
In reply, respondent construed Mrs. Vetrano's
posttrial brief as an election for relief under both
subsections (b) and (c) of section 6015. As to relief
under section 6015(b), respondent noted that petitioners
bear the burden of proving that Mrs. Vetrano did not know,
and had no reason to know of the payments by BMAP to her
husband, and respondent argued that the record contains
ample evidence to prove that Mrs. Vetrano knew of her
husband's unreported income from BMAP. Respondent also
argued that it would not be inequitable to hold
Mrs. Vetrano liable for the deficiency in tax for 1993.
Accordingly, respondent "determined that Mrs. Vetrano is
not eligible to elect application of �6015(b) and therefore
denies her claim to limit her liability under that
section."
As to relief under section 6015(c), respondent noted
that petitioners had not shown that Mrs. Vetrano met a
threshold requirement for eligibility, set forth in section
6015(c)(3)(A)(i), to elect section 6015(c) relief.
Respondent's brief states as follows:
Mrs. Vetrano made her election on page 12
of petitioners' brief. A copy of the divorce
petition filed on August 7, 1998 was attached
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