Albert M. Graham and Martha A. Graham - Page 48

                                       - 48 -                                         
          received cash and an interest in two parcels of real property               
          through the Anis partnership in 1995.                                       
               Petitioner has not shown that his failure to include in                
          income for 1995 amounts from the Anis partnership ($107,073) for            
          settlement of his claim for attorney’s fees was not due to fraud.           
          Thus, petitioner is liable for the addition to tax under section            
          6663 with respect to the underpayment for 1995 attributable to              
          the Anis partnership distributions.                                         
                    b.   Income Diverted by Edgar in 1995 and 1998                    
               The parties stipulated that Edgar deposited $67,437 in 1995            
          and $87,943 in 1998 in petitioner’s Big Bear checking account and           
          paid some of her personal expenses from that account, and we have           
          found that she did so without his knowledge or consent.  Thus,              
          petitioners’ failure to report income of $67,437 in 1995 and                
          $87,943 in 1998 attributable to Edgar’s diversion of those funds            
          was not due to fraud.                                                       
                    c.   Client Fees Omitted From Original 1998 Return and            
                         Reported on Amended 1998 Return                              
               Petitioner admits that client fees of $135,422 were                    
          deposited in O’Leary’s account in 1998 and were not deposited in            
          petitioner’s law firm account.  Petitioner contends that these              
          fees were sent to O’Leary to be invested, not to be concealed               
          from respondent.  Petitioner claims that he told Lewellen about             
          those fees, but Lewellen erroneously failed to report them on               
          petitioners’ original 1998 return.  Petitioner claims that he and           





Page:  Previous  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011