- 2 -
Respondent determined deficiencies of $3,525 and $2,842 in
petitioner’s Federal income taxes for taxable years 2002 and
2003, respectively. Petitioner does not challenge these
deficiencies. This case involves petitioner’s election to seek
relief from joint and several liability for Federal income taxes
for 2002 and 2003 under section 6015(b), (c), or (f).2
Respondent determined that petitioner is not entitled to relief
under any of the aforementioned subsections of section 6015. The
sole issue for decision is whether petitioner is entitled to
relief under section 6015(b), (c), or (f) for taxable years 2002
and 2003.
Some of the facts were stipulated. Those facts, with the
annexed exhibits, are so found and are made part hereof.
Petitioner’s legal residence at the time the petition was filed
was Fresno, California.
2Prior to filing the petition in this case, petitioner
participated in a case in which the Court decided that she and
her spouse were liable for deficiencies in taxes for 1999-2001.
See Garza v. Commissioner, T.C. Summary Opinion 2005-95.
Petitioner meaningfully participated in that proceeding and did
not seek relief under sec. 6015 at that time. Accordingly, the
Court granted respondent’s motion for partial summary judgment in
this case since the judicial doctrine of res judicata bars
petitioner from requesting sec. 6015 relief for 1999-2001, the
years at issue in the prior proceeding. Sec. 6015(g)(2); Huynh
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-180 (where a requesting spouse
meaningfully participated in a prior proceeding, did not seek
sec. 6015 relief at that time, and that proceeding’s decision has
become final, the requesting spouse is barred from seeking relief
for the years at issue in the prior proceeding).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011