- 9 -
each requirement of section 6015(b)(1). See Rule 142(a). We
find that petitioner fails to meet the requirement of section
6015(b)(1)(C); therefore, we need not, and do not, decide whether
petitioner satisfies the other requirements of section
6015(b)(1).
Pursuant to section 6015(b)(1)(C), petitioner must
establish that she did not know and further had no reason to know
of the understatement in tax on the joint return which she filed
with her husband. This Court has held that “where a spouse
seeking relief has actual knowledge of the underlying transaction
that produced the omitted income, innocent spouse relief is
denied.” Cheshire v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183, 192-193 (2000),
affd. 282 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2002).
In the present case, petitioner and Mr. Glaze maintained a
joint checking account. Both petitioner and Mr. Glaze deposited
their respective wage income into said joint checking account.
Petitioner occasionally reviewed the bank statements regarding
their joint checking account, and she personally used moneys from
the joint checking account to pay joint household expenses.
Further, petitioner knew that Mr. Glaze drove trucks for
Mayflower and knew he was receiving wages from Mayflower.
Petitioner also reviewed the 1995 joint income tax return before
filing it with the Internal Revenue Service.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011