Marie G. and Michael L. Pacheco - Page 11




                                       - 10 -                                         

          groundless.  Petitioners knew, or should have known, that a                 
          substantial portion of the itemized deductions at issue was false           
          and could not be sustained.  Petitioners knew that they could               
          deduct only amounts that they had actually paid.  They made no              
          attempt to determine the qualifications of their return preparer            
          and, moreover, did not seek other professional advice to satisfy            
          the concerns they had over the returns prepared by Mr. Beltran.             
          Petitioners cited no legal authority to the Court that, under               
          similar facts, would exonerate them from the penalties under                
          section 6662(a).                                                            
               The function of this Court is to provide a forum to decide             
          issues relating to liability for Federal taxes.  Any reasonable             
          and prudent person, under the facts presented to the Court,                 
          should have known that petitioners' claimed deductions could not            
          have been sustained, and petitioners knew that.  This Court does            
          not and should not countenance the use of this Court as a vehicle           
          for disgruntled litigants to proclaim the wrongdoing of another,            
          their return preparer, as a basis for relief from penalties that            
          were determined by respondent on facts that clearly are not                 
          sustainable.  Golub v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-288.                   
          Petitioners, therefore, have interfered with the Court's function           
          to the detriment of other parties having cases with legitimate              
          issues for the Court to consider.  Petitioners have caused                  
          needless expense and wasted resources, not only for the Court,              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011