Bennett v. Comm'r

2014 T.C. Memo. 256, 108 T.C.M. 641, 2014 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 253
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedDecember 22, 2014
DocketDocket No. 15929-10.
StatusUnpublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 2014 T.C. Memo. 256 (Bennett v. Comm'r) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bennett v. Comm'r, 2014 T.C. Memo. 256, 108 T.C.M. 641, 2014 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 253 (tax 2014).

Opinion

HAMLET C. BENNETT, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Bennett v. Comm'r
Docket No. 15929-10.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2014-256; 2014 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 253; 108 T.C.M. (CCH) 641;
December 22, 2014, Filed

Decision will be entered under Rule 155.

*253 Hamlet C. Bennett, Pro se.
Nhi T. Luu and Kimberly T. Packer, for respondent.
COHEN, Judge.

COHEN
MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

COHEN, Judge: In two notices, respondent determined deficiencies and additions to tax as follows:

Additions to tax/penalties
YearDeficiencySec. 6651(f)1Sec. 6651(a)(2)
1995$128,770$93,358.25$32,192.50
1996125,55091,023.7531,387.50
1997148,087107,363.0837,021.75
1998223,584162,098.4055,896.00
1999177,637128,786.8344,409.25
2000337,105244,401.1384,276.25
2001280,939203,680.7870,234.75
2002368,152266,910.2092,038.00
2003284,406206,194.3571,101.50

*257 1The amount set forth above for the penalty under section 6651(f) for each taxable year is at the maximum rate of 75% of the amount required to be shown as tax on the return. These amounts will be reduced to 72.5% if the Court sustains the additions to tax under section 6651(a)(2).

Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Petitioner's unreported income was determined using bank deposits plus some specific income items from payments diverted to or for the benefit of petitioner. The Internal Revenue Service*254 (IRS) prepared substitutes for returns *258 under section 6020(b), but petitioner failed to pay the amounts shown on those returns. In the answer respondent alleged increased amounts to reflect that petitioner's status during 1995 through 2001 was married filing separately, rather than single as used in the statutory notice. Before trial, respondent reviewed additional bank records, reduced gross receipts for 1996 through 1998, and allowed business expense deductions for 1995 through 1998 that had not been allowed in the notices of deficiency. (Deductions had been allowed in the statutory notice for the later years.) The issue for decision is whether petitioner's failure to file tax returns for the years in issue was fraudulent.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been deemed stipulated pursuant to Rule 91(f). The stipulated facts are incorporated in our findings by this reference. Petitioner alleged a residence in Louisiana at the time he filed his petition.

Petitioner was born in Los Angeles, California. He attended the Art Center School, studied architecture, and graduated with a bachelor of arts degree in January 1960. In 1965 he moved to Hawaii. He obtained jobs doing architectural illustrations of housing*255 tracts that were being developed. Petitioner has been a licensed architect since 1985.

*259 Petitioner married Beverly Bennett in 1970. They were married until her death in September 2001.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

William E. Flynn
U.S. Tax Court, 2021
Batsch v. Comm'r
2016 T.C. Memo. 140 (U.S. Tax Court, 2016)
Green v. Comm'r
2016 T.C. Memo. 67 (U.S. Tax Court, 2016)
Crummey v. Comm'r
2016 T.C. Memo. 9 (U.S. Tax Court, 2016)
Leyshon v. Comm'r
2015 T.C. Memo. 104 (U.S. Tax Court, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2014 T.C. Memo. 256, 108 T.C.M. 641, 2014 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 253, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bennett-v-commr-tax-2014.