- 41 -
Petitioner did not call Mr. Wolf to testify about Mr. Wolf’s
alleged oral advice. We presume that petitioner did not call Mr.
Wolf as a witness because his testimony would have been unfavor-
able to petitioner’s position in this case. Wichita Terminal
Elevator Co. v. Commissioner, 6 T.C. 1158, 1165 (1946), affd. 162
F.2d 513 (10th Cir. 1947). We are unwilling to rely on Mr.
Saunders’ testimony regarding Mr. Wolf’s alleged oral advice.
On the record before us, we find that petitioner has failed
to establish that it provided all the necessary information
concerning the disputed transaction to Price Waterhouse. On that
record, we further find that petitioner has failed to establish
that it followed the advice of Price Waterhouse with respect to
the disputed transaction. On the record before us, we find that
petitioner has failed to carry its burden of proving that there
was reasonable cause for, and that it acted in good faith with
respect to, the underpayment in this case.
Based upon our examination of the entire record before us,
we find that petitioner has failed to carry its burden of estab-
lishing that petitioner is not liable for the accuracy-related
penalty under section 6662(a).
We have considered all of the contentions and arguments of
petitioner and respondent that are not discussed herein, and we
24(...continued)
performing services for petitioner under a consulting arrange-
ment.
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011