- 12 -
Court a joint petition for redetermination challenging a joint
notice of deficiency for the taxable year 1981. After obtaining
separate counsel, the electing spouse filed an amendment to the
petition asserting her entitlement to relief from joint and
several liability under former section 6013(e). After both
taxpayers entered into separate stipulations with the
Commissioner conceding an income tax deficiency of $21,711 and
the application of increased interest under section 6621(c), the
Commissioner entered into a further stipulation with the electing
spouse granting her relief from joint and several liability under
section 6015(c). Upon learning of the second stipulation, the
nonelecting spouse declined to execute a stipulated decision for
submission to the Court, prompting the Commissioner to file a
motion for entry of decision. In denying the Commissioner’s
motion, the Court stated:
Section 6015(e)(1) is structured so that
administrative consideration (or failure to rule) will
precede any court action when innocent spouse status is
raised in a stand alone petition. Section 6015(g)(2),
in turn, contemplates an opportunity for the
nonelecting spouse to participate at the administrative
level. Section 6015(e)(4) then speaks of a similar
chance for participation should the matter move from an
administrative to a judicial forum. Hence, as a general
premise, we believe that these subsections, when read
together, reveal a concern on the part of the lawmakers
with fairness to the nonelecting spouse and with
providing him or her an opportunity to be heard on
innocent spouse issues. Presumably, the purpose of
affording to the nonelecting spouse an opportunity to
be heard first in administrative proceedings and then
in judicial proceedings is to ensure that innocent
spouse relief is granted on the merits after taking
into account all relevant evidence. After all, easing
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011