- 9 -
6015(e)(1) for a review of the Commissioner’s determination. Our
jurisdiction in cases brought under section 6015(e)(1)
encompasses a review of the Commissioner’s determination with
respect to all relief afforded by section 6015. Ewing v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 494, 497-507 (2002); Fernandez v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 324, 330-331 (2000); Butler v.
Commissioner, supra at 289-290. This type of case is referred to
as a “stand-alone” case, in that petitioner’s request for relief
is independent of any deficiency proceeding. Ewing v.
Commissioner, supra at 497 (quoting Fernandez v. Commissioner,
supra at 329).
In this case, petitioner seeks equitable relief under
section 6015(f). To prevail, petitioner must prove that
respondent’s denial of equitable relief from joint liability
under section 6015(f) was an abuse of discretion. See Rule
142(a); Washington v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 137, 146 (2003);
Jonson v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 106, 125 (2002), affd. 353 F.3d
1181 (10th Cir. 2003); Cheshire v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183,
198 (2000), affd. 282 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2002); Demirjian v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-22.2 The Commissioner’s exercise
of discretion is entitled to due deference; in order to prevail,
the taxpayer must demonstrate that, in not granting relief, the
Commissioner exercised his discretion arbitrarily, capriciously,
2Petitioner has not alleged sec. 7491 applies.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011