- 22 -
Mr. Coyle’s testimony about the amount and type of income he
received from Regal was at best vague and, at worst, evasive. We
conclude that Mr. Coyle’s testimony was self-serving and lacked
credibility. See Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. at 77.
On the basis of the entire record, we conclude that the
underpayments of tax due from Mr. Coyle for 1992 and 1993 were
due to fraud. We sustain respondent’s determinations of fraud
penalties under section 6663 with respect to Mr. Coyle for 1992
and 1993.
4. Period of Limitations
a. Regal
We have concluded that Regal's underpayments of tax were not
due to fraud. Thus, section 6501(c)(1) does not prevent the
running of the periods of limitations with respect to Regal.
We look to whether the periods of limitations are open under
section 6501(e). Section 6501(e) extends the period within which
the Commissioner must assess an underpayment of tax to 6 years
from the date the return was filed. Section 6501(e) is
applicable if a taxpayer omits from gross income an amount
properly includable which is greater than 25 percent of the
amount of gross income stated in the return. “Gross income”
means, in the case of a trade or business, the total of the
amounts received or accrued from the sale of goods or services
(if required to be shown on the return) before reducing it by the
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011