Sandra R. Murray and Khaled M. Abouelnoor - Page 4

                                        - 3 -                                         
          $55,302.  On their return, petitioners reported zero taxable                
          income on line 41,2 zero tax on line 55, and an overpayment of              
          tax of $3,085 on line 71a attributable to withholding.  See secs.           
          1(a)(1), 3(a), (c).  Petitioners did not report any items of tax            
          preference as defined by section 57 on their return.                        
               Petitioners did not report any liability for the AMT on line           
          43 of their return, and they did not complete or attach to their            
          return Form 6251, Alternative Minimum Tax--Individuals.                     
               Thereafter, respondent sent petitioners a letter dated April           
          28, 2003, requesting additional information and stating that                
          petitioner should file Form 6251.  Soon thereafter, petitioners             
          provided to respondent information expressing their view that               
          they were not liable for the AMT.  Within 4 to 6 weeks,                     
          respondent issued a refund to petitioners.                                  
               The following year, respondent commenced an examination of             
          petitioners’ 2002 return.  In connection with the examination,              
          respondent sent petitioners a 30-day letter dated March 24, 2004,           
          explaining proposed changes to petitioners’ taxable year 2002               
          resulting from their liability for the AMT.                                 
               Petitioners responded by letter dated April 3, 2004, stating           
          that the proposed changes were incorrect.  In this regard,                  
          petitioners relied on their 2003 letter to respondent, which                
          stated that they were not liable for the AMT because they did not           

               2  Mathematically, petitioners’ taxable income is -$2,209.             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011