- 16 -
This section grants the Commissioner discretion to grant
equitable relief to any individual who files a joint return and
who is not entitled to either full/apportioned relief or
proportionate relief. Because we have held that petitioner is
not entitled to either full/apportioned relief or proportionate
relief for any of the subject years, we consider whether
petitioner is entitled to equitable relief for one or all of
those years.
Our determination of whether petitioner is in fact entitled
to equitable relief, in whole or in part, is made on the basis of
a trial de novo and is not limited to matter contained in
respondent’s administrative record. See Ewing v. Commissioner,
122 T.C. 32, 44, (2004). Whereas respondent denied petitioner’s
claim to equitable relief, petitioner bears the burden of proving
that this action was an abuse of respondent’s discretion. See
Washington v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 137, 146 (2003); Cheshire v.
Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183, 198 (2000), affd. 282 F.3d 326 (5th
Cir. 2002). In order to prevail, petitioner must demonstrate
that respondent exercised his discretion arbitrarily,
capriciously, or without sound basis in fact or law when he
denied her the requested equitable relief. See Jonson v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. at 125.
As directed by section 6015(f), the Commissioner has
prescribed guidelines under which a taxpayer may qualify for
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011