- 9 -
Pritchett v. Commissioner, 63 T.C. 149, 175-176 (1974).
The record reflects that Mr. Kington, the preparer of her
original Federal income tax returns, was petitioner’s accountant
for 7 years. However, petitioner has not shown Mr. Kington’s
qualifications or what records she provided to him in order to
prepare her returns.5 Therefore, we are unable to find that
petitioner’s reliance on Mr. Kington was in fact reasonable.
The record also reflects that petitioner relied on Mr.
Nemiroff, her attorney, in submitting amended returns for 1994
and 1995.6 However, in the context of this case, petitioner’s
reliance on her attorney and her willingness to correct her
mistakes are irrelevant. As respondent has applied the section
6662(a) penalty to the underpayment reflected on petitioner’s
original returns, we measure petitioner’s good faith and
reasonable reliance as of the date of filing her original
returns.
In that regard, petitioner argues that the penalty should
apply to the underpayment reflected on petitioner’s amended, as
5 The credentials of Ron Kington are unclear from the
record.
6 Petitioner also contends that, on the advice of her
attorney, she hired a new accountant to prepare her amended
returns. Other than petitioner’s testimony, there is no evidence
that she did so. In that regard, petitioner’s amended returns are
not even signed by a tax preparer.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011