- 14 -
abused his discretion under section 6015(f) in denying equitable
relief to petitioner from joint and several liability.2
Respondent raises an issue as to the admissibility into
evidence herein of facts not presented to respondent’s Appeals
office during the administrative hearing, asserts that he did not
abuse his discretion in denying petitioner relief from joint and
several liability, and, for the first time in his opening post-
trial brief, raises a jurisdictional question as to whether we
may review in this underpayment case respondent’s denial of
section 6015(f) relief.3 In Ewing v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 32,
44 (2004), we held that we are not limited to a consideration of
the facts presented to respondent’s Appeals office, and in Ewing
2 Sec. 6015(f) provides:
Equitable Relief.--Under procedures prescribed by
the Secretary, if--
(1) taking into account all the facts and
circumstances, it is inequitable to hold the
individual liable for any unpaid tax or any
deficiency (or any portion of either); and
(2) relief is not available to such
individual under subsection (b) or (c),
the Secretary may relieve such individual of such
liability.
3 In respondent’s pretrial memorandum, in respondent’s
opening statement at trial, throughout the trial, and in
respondent’s reply brief, respondent makes no mention of the
jurisdictional question. Only in respondent’s opening posttrial
brief does respondent raise this jurisdictional question and only
by way of an obscure sentence in the middle of arguments relating
to other issues. Respondent does not identify this
jurisdictional question as a discrete issue in this case, and
respondent provides no argument on this jurisdictional question.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011