- 24 -
material factor in deciding whether to grant equitable relief
under section 6015(b)(1)(D) or its predecessor section
6013(e)(1)(D)11 “[w]hether the failure to report correctly tax
liability results from ‘concealment, overreaching, or any other
wrongdoing’ on the part of the ‘guilty’ spouse”. Hayman v.
Commissioner, 992 F.2d 1256, 1262 (2d Cir. 1993), affg. T.C.
Memo. 1992-228; see also Ewing v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. at 48-
49; Jonson v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. at 119.
For all of the above reasons, we hold that respondent’s
denial of equitable relief under section 6015(f) was an abuse of
discretion and that it would be inequitable to hold petitioner
liable for the underpayment of tax reflected on the original 1996
return. Therefore, petitioner is entitled to a refund of the
additional tax and associated interest paid in connection with
the filing of the 1996 amended return. See sec. 6015(g)(1).
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
for petitioner.
11 Cases interpreting former sec. 6013(e) remain
instructive to an analysis of sec. 6015(b)(1)(D), Jonson v.
Commissioner, supra, and the equitable factors we consider under
sec. 6015(b)(1)(D) are the same equitable factors we consider
under sec. 6015(f), Alt v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 306, 316
(2002).
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Last modified: May 25, 2011