Robby Goodale Gilbert - Page 14

                                       - 13 -                                         
          that petitioner’s status as the sole owner of Interactive Arts              
          subjects him to any and all tax liability associated with the               
          income earned by the business.  Respondent did not, however,                
          offer evidence to rebut petitioner’s testimony, which this Court            
          finds credible, that both petitioner and Ms. Peet actively                  
          participated in the affairs of Interactive Arts that produced               
          income for the business during the years at issue.  Furthermore,            
          this Court has held that the income and losses of a business are            
          not blindly attributed to the person listed as proprietor of that           
          business on the joint return.  See, e.g., Rowe v. Commissioner,             
          T.C. Memo. 2001-325.  Accordingly, this factor weighs in favor of           
          granting relief.                                                            
               Petitioner appears to have done everything within his power            
          to settle amicably the tax liabilities for the years at issue and           
          made a good faith attempt to comply with the tax laws and satisfy           
          his obligations with the IRS.  Barring Ms. Peet’s deception, the            
          Court is convinced that the outstanding liabilities would have              
          been paid.  Upon consideration of all of the facts and                      
          circumstances, the Court finds that respondent’s determination to           
          deny relief under section 6015(f) to petitioner was an abuse of             
          discretion.  Weighing all of the factors in this case both                  
          supporting and opposing granting relief to petitioner, the Court            
          is satisfied that it would be inequitable to deny petitioner                
          relief under section 6015(f).                                               

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011