- 8 -
background, we do not think her failure to inquire was
reasonable. Cohen v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-537.
Accordingly, petitioner is not entitled to relief under section
6015(b).
We do not need to engage in a lengthy discussion of whether
petitioner qualifies for relief under section 6015(c) because the
only relief she seeks is a refund. Section 6015(g)(3) prohibits
refunds under section 6015(c). Accordingly, petitioner does not
qualify for relief under section 6015(c).
The Commissioner has discretion, pursuant to section
6015(f), to grant relief from joint and several liability, where
relief is not available under section 6015(b) or (c), if the
facts and circumstances indicate that it would be inequitable to
hold the requesting spouse liable for the deficiency. This Court
reviews the Commissioner’s denial of relief pursuant to section
6015(f) under an abuse of discretion standard. Butler v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 276, 287-292 (2000). We defer to
respondent’s determination unless it is arbitrary, capricious, or
without sound basis in fact. Jonson v. Commissioner, 118 T.C.
106, 125 (2002), affd. 353 F.3d 1181 (10th Cir. 2003).
Petitioner bears the burden of proving that there was an abuse of
discretion. Abelein v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-274.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011