- 14 -
conclusive that there was never a valid marriage between
petitioner and Mr. Khalil Aly.
Accordingly, we conclude that petitioner is not entitled to
relief under section 6015(f) because Mr. Khalil Aly was still
married at the time that their ceremony in Florida purportedly
occurred, making any union between him and petitioner
meretricious from its inception. Moreover, a joint return could
not be filed by petitioner and Mr. Khalil Aly under these facts
as Mr. Khalil Aly’s previous marriage had not been legally
dissolved. Chap v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1964-26. The fact
that petitioner and Mr. Khalil Aly resided together in Delaware
for 21 months is irrelevant, as there is no State that recognizes
a bigamous common law marriage. Ochs v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1986-595. Since petitioner could not be married to Mr. Khalil
Aly, petitioner is not entitled to joint filing status for the
2001 taxable year.
Petitioner’s Liability for Taxable Year 2001
Petitioner’s correct filing status for the taxable year 2001
should be “single.” Petitioner’s income tax liability for 2001
should be calculated using the filing status “single.”3
3 Exhibit 13 in this case is a copy of petitioner’s amended
tax return with the filing status single for year 2001 that she
submitted to respondent sometime before the trial. We are unsure
as to whether respondent has accepted this return. As a result
of this opinion, respondent should accept the amended return as
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011