- 25 -
v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).15 The burden was on
petitioners to show that respondent abused his discretion. The
burden was not on respondent to provide enough information to
show that he did not abuse his discretion. Nevertheless, we find
that we had more than sufficient information to review
respondent’s determination.
2. Mrs. Lindley’s Innocent Spouse Case
Petitioners argue that the final notice is invalid as it
relates to Mrs. Lindley because she has an innocent spouse case
pending before the Tax Court at docket No. 13872-04. In the
alternative, petitioners ask us to determine that Mrs. Lindley is
in innocent spouse. This issue is moot because, on April 6,
2006, the Tax Court entered a stipulated decision in docket No.
13872-04 reflecting the parties’ agreement that Mrs. Lindley “is
not entitled to relief under I.R.C. section 6015(b) or (f) with
respect to her income tax liabilities for the taxable years 1987,
1988, 1989, 1990, and 1991.”
15 While sec. 7491 shifts the burden of proof and/or the
burden of production to the Commissioner in certain
circumstances, this section is not applicable in this case
because respondent’s examination of petitioners’ returns did not
commence after July 22, 1998. See Internal Revenue Service
Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec.
3001(c), 112 Stat. 727.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011