Kevin J. Morse - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
          Biaggi v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-48, affd. 8 Fed. Appx. 66           
          (2001); Wilson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-454; Avery v.               
          Commissioner, supra; Williamson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.                 
          1993-246.                                                                   
               Petitioner has failed to submit credible evidence that he              
          knowingly filed the false returns for any reason other than to              
          evade taxes he knew to be owing.  Thus, we conclude that                    
          petitioner fraudulently intended to underpay his tax for each of            
          the years at issue.                                                         
               Further, petitioner has failed to submit credible evidence             
          showing that any part of the underpayment attributable to the               
          omitted income is not due to fraud.  To the contrary, the record            
          establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the entire                
          underpayment for each year is due to fraud.  Accordingly, we hold           
          that petitioner is liable for the section 6663 civil fraud                  
          penalty on the entire underpayment for each year at issue.  Sec.            
          6663(b).                                                                    
          Issue 2. Whether the Doctrines of Res Judicata, Collateral                  
                    Estoppel, and/or Double Jeopardy Bar Assessment of                
                    Deficiencies and Interest for All of the Years at Issue           
                    in an Amount Greater Than $61,700                                 
               Petitioner asserts that the doctrines of res judicata,                 
          collateral estoppel, and/or double jeopardy preclude retrial of,            
          or estop respondent with respect to, the liabilities before this            
          Court.  We disagree.                                                        







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