- 43 -
There is also clear and convincing evidence that petitioner
failed to report substantial income from the sale of his interest
in Tri-City and Newark Wreckers in 1990.
Accordingly, we are convinced that respondent has proven by
clear and convincing evidence that petitioner underpaid his
income taxes due and owing for the years at issue.
2. Intent To Defraud
As previously explained, the Commissioner bears the burden
of proving fraud by clear and convincing evidence. Sadler v.
Commissioner, 113 T.C. 99, 102 (1999); Posnanski v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2001-26; see Henson v. Commissioner, 887 F.2d 1520
(11th Cir. 1989), affg. in part and revg. in part on another
ground T.C. Memo. 1986-303; Temple v. Commissioner, supra.
“Where fraud is determined for each of several years,
respondent’s burden applies separately for each of the years.”
Temple v. Commissioner, supra; see Cefalu v. Commissioner, 276
F.2d 122 (5th Cir. 1960), affg. T.C. Memo. 1958-37; Baumgardner
v. Commissioner, supra.
“Fraud is the intentional wrongdoing on the part of a
taxpayer to evade a tax believed to be owing.” Temple v.
Commissioner, supra; see DiLeo v. Commissioner, 96 T.C. at 874;
Prof. Serv. v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 888, 930 (1982). “The
required state of mind is one which, ‘if translated into action,
is well calculated to cheat or deceive the government.’” Zell v.
Page: Previous 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011