- 11 -
Petitioner, however, is entitled to section 6015(c) relief
with respect to the disallowed charitable contribution
deductions. We have accepted petitioner’s testimony that she did
not read the returns, that she was unaware of the deductions, and
that she was not involved in Mr. Elesh’s finances. Because
respondent has not shown that petitioner actually knew that the
claimed deductions were false, respondent has not shown that
petitioner had actual knowledge that the disallowed charitable
contribution deductions would give rise to a deficiency. Sec.
6015(c)(3)(C); Rowe v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-325
(taxpayer entitled to section 6015(c) relief where she did not
have actual knowledge of fabricated charitable contribution
deductions).
In the context of petitioner’s request for section 6015(b)
relief, respondent argues that the charitable contribution
deductions are “attributable to erroneous items” of both
petitioner and Mr. Elesh. See sec. 6015(b)(1)(B). We infer that
respondent’s position, with respect to section 6015(c) relief, is
that the charitable contribution deductions should be allocated
to both petitioner and Mr. Elesh. See sec. 6015(c)(1),
(d)(3)(A).7 Petitioner bears the burden of proving that the
7See also sec. 1.6015-3(d)(2)(iv), Income Tax Regs.
(Erroneous deductions “unrelated to a business or investment are
also generally allocated 50% to each spouse, unless the evidence
shows that a different allocation is appropriate.”). See supra
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011