Simone Joye - Page 15




                                       - 15 -                                         
                         *    *    *    *    *    *    *                              
               Petitioner strongly believes that IRC Section                          
               6404(e)(1) does apply in this case, because there is                   
               evidence in this case which shows that delays were not                 
               attributable to Petitioner “Failure to file timely tax                 
               returns” as Petitioner has been corresponding with the                 
               IRS regarding these tax years since 1988.  Addition-                   
               ally, Petitioner is accused of raising at the Appeals                  
               Conference a “W-4 argument [which] appears to have been                
          W-4 form since 1988.  [Reproduced literally.]                               
                                       OPINION                                        
               Petitioner does not dispute respondent’s determinations in             
          the notice of determination that respondent may proceed to                  
          collect tax of $531 for 1987, $1,490 for 1988, and $170 for 1989.           
          Petitioner disputes only respondent’s determinations that respon-           
          dent may proceed to collect additions to tax under section                  
          6651(a)(1) and (2) and interest as provided by law for each of              
          those years.4                                                               


               4With respect to the additions to tax under sec. 6651(a)(1)            
          and (2) that respondent assessed for each of petitioner’s taxable           
          years 1987, 1988, and 1989, petitioner indicated at trial that              
          she disputes that she is liable for those additions to tax.  On             
          brief, petitioner indicates that she seeks “abatement” of those             
          additions to tax.  We construe petitioner’s position as a request           
          to review (1) whether she is liable for the additions to tax                
          under sec. 6651(a)(1) and (2) that respondent assessed for each             
          of her taxable years 1987, 1988, and 1989 and (2) whether if the            
          Court were to find that she is so liable, respondent may proceed            
          to collect such additions to tax.                                           
               With respect to the interest as provided by law for each of            
          petitioner’s taxable years 1987, 1988, and 1989, petitioner                 
          indicated at trial and on brief that she seeks abatement of such            
          interest during the period 1990 to the present.  We construe                
          petitioner’s position as a request to review respondent’s failure           
                                                             (continued...)           





Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011