Cheryl McKnight - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         
               Overton, however, as executor of John’s estate, contacted              
          respondent’s Compliance Office and objected to petitioner’s                 
          request for innocent spouse relief.  At the hearing, Overton                
          alleged that petitioner actively participated in the day-to-day             
          operation of John’s business, that petitioner owned a 50-percent            
          interest in MGI, and that petitioner was financially able to bear           
          the burden of payment of petitioner and John’s 1995 joint Federal           
          income taxes.  Overton also expressed concern that if petitioner            
          were granted relief, respondent’s claim for payment from John’s             
          estate of additional amounts likely would reduce any payment her            
          son might receive from John’s estate.                                       
               Respondent’s Compliance Office reviewed Overton’s objection            
          to petitioner’s request for innocent spouse relief but did not              
          alter the proposal to grant full relief to petitioner.                      
               On August 20, 2004, Overton mailed a letter to respondent’s            
          Compliance Office in which she formally objected to any relief              
          being given to petitioner.  Based on Overton’s written objection,           
          respondent’s Compliance Office transferred petitioner’s request             
          for innocent spouse relief to respondent’s Appeals Office for               
          further review.3                                                            
               On November 17, 2004, respondent’s Appeals Office determined           
          that petitioner qualified for relief from joint liability under             

               3  At the trial herein, Overton did not participate as a               
          party, but she did testify as a witness.                                    

Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011