Penalties Under the Code
Tax Opinions / Memorandum Opinions / Penalties Under the Code

Alta V Limited Partnership v. Commissioner
T.C. Memo. 2020-8

On January 13, 2020, the Tax Court issued a Memorandum Opinion in the case of Alta V Limited Partnership v. Commissioner (T.C. Memo. 2020-8). The issue presented in Alta V Limited Partnership v. Commissioner was whether the petitioners were liable as transferees for their portion of the unpaid, determined, and assessed deficiency, penalties, and additions to tax with respect to the transferor’s corporate income tax. Transferee Liability Under the Code – IRC § 6901(a) - Alta V Limited Partnership v. Commissioner The liability of a transferee of the property of a taxpayer who owes Federal income tax is assessed, paid, and collected in the same manner and subject to the same provisions as the underlying taxes. IRC § 6901(a). For purposes of IRC § 6901, the term “transferee” includes, inter alia, a donee, heir, legatee, devisee, distributee, and shareholder of a dissolved corporation. See IRC § 6901(h); Treas. Reg. § 301.6901-1(b).…

0 Comments
January 13, 2020
Income Tax Issues
Tax Opinions / Income Tax Issues / Penalties Under the Code

Rivera v. Commissioner
T.C. Memo. 2020-7

On January 13, 2020, the Tax Court issued a Memorandum Opinion in the case of Rivera v. Commissioner (T.C. Memo. 2020-7). The issues presented in Rivera v. Commissioner were whether (1) the petitioners’ partnership received and failed to report gross receipts on Forms 1065, (2) the partnership is entitled to certain deductions claimed on the partnership returns, and (3) the petitioners are liable for IRC § 6662(a) accuracy-related penalties.

(more…)

0 Comments
January 13, 2020
Procedural Issues
Tax Opinions / Memorandum Opinions / Procedural Issues

Seely v. Commissioner
T.C. Memo. 2020-6

On January 13, 2020, the Tax Court issued a Memorandum Opinion in the case of Seely v. Commissioner (T.C. Memo. 2020-6). The issue presented in Seely v. Commissioner was whether the taxpayers provided sufficient extrinsic evidence to demonstrate the timely mailing of a petition, even though the envelope in which the petition was mailed bore no postmark. If so, then the Tax Court had jurisdiction to redetermine the deficiency.  If not, then no jurisdiction would lie. Background in Seely v. Commissioner The petitioners are residents of the Richland, Washington, about as far away from Washington, D.C., as one can get in the contiguous United States (2,603 miles, give or take). The IRS mailed a notice of deficiency on March 28, 2017, by certified mail, advising the petitioners of the 90-day deadline (from the date of notice) to file a petition with the Tax Court, or until June 26, 2017. The…

1 Comment
January 13, 2020