- 3 -
determination (the petition).
The sole issue for our decision is whether respondent abused
his discretion in denying petitioner relief from joint and
several liability under section 6015(b), (c), (f).
FINDINGS OF FACT2
Some facts have been stipulated and are so found. The
stipulation of facts, with accompanying exhibits, is incorporated
herein by this reference.
At the time the petition was filed, petitioner resided in
Brooklyn, New York.
The Joint Returns
Petitioner and her husband, Louis Rosenthal (separately,
petitioner and Louis; together, the Rosenthals) timely made a
joint Federal income tax return for calendar year 1996 on or
about February 27, 1997. That return (sometimes, the original
1996 return) reported “total income” on line 22 of $32,245
consisting, in part, of $1,308 in taxable “pensions and
annuities”. The return reported tax due of $1,631, total tax
payments of $5,774, and claimed an overpayment of $4,143 to be
2 Petitioner did not file a reply brief. As a result,
petitioner has failed to set forth objections to respondent’s
proposed findings of fact. See Rule 151(e)(3). Accordingly, we
conclude that petitioner concedes that respondent’s proposed
findings of fact are correct except to the extent that
petitioner’s findings of fact are clearly inconsistent therewith.
See Jonson v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 106, 108 n.4 (2002), affd.
353 F.3d 1181 (10th Cir. 2003).
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