Joseph A. and Sari F. Deihl - Page 75

                                       - 75 -                                         
          Westbrook v. Commissioner, 68 F.3d 868, 881 (5th Cir. 1995),                
          affg. T.C. Memo. 1993-634; Cramer v. Commissioner, 101 T.C. 225,            
          251 (1993), affd. 64 F.3d 1406 (9th Cir. 1995); Ma-Tran Corp. v.            
          Commissioner, 70 T.C. 158, 173 (1978); Pessin v. Commissioner, 59           
          T.C. 473, 489 (1972); Ellwest Stereo Theatres v. Commissioner,              
          T.C. Memo. 1995-610.                                                        
               As previously indicated, section 7491(c) places the burden             
          of production on the Commissioner.  The notices of deficiency               
          issued to petitioners generally asserted applicability of the               
          section 6662(a) penalty on account of negligence or disregard,              
          substantial understatement, and/or substantial valuation                    
          misstatement.  See sec. 6662(b).  Respondent in its pretrial                
          memorandum and on brief has addressed only negligence or                    
          disregard of rules or regulations as the basis for the penalties,           
          and we shall do likewise.                                                   
               We conclude that respondent has met the section 7491(c)                
          burden of production with respect to the negligence penalties.              
          The evidence adduced in these cases reveals a serious dearth of             
          adequate records and substantiation for reported items.  With               
          this threshold showing, the burden shifts to petitioners to                 
          establish that they acted with reasonable cause and in good faith           
          as to the claimed items.                                                    
               Petitioners here assert a reliance defense as the basis upon           
          which they should be relieved of liability for the section                  
          6662(a) penalties.  Mr. Deihl, Mrs. Deihl, and Mr. Goltz                    




Page:  Previous  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  78  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011