1988 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 195">*195 With respect to petitioner's 1976 and 1977 joint Federal income tax returns, there were underpayments of tax required to be shown on the returns, and all or part of these underpayments were due to fraud. On April 11, 1983, and April 18, 1986, respondent assessed additions to petitioners' Federal income taxes for 1976 and 1977, respectively, pursuant to
MEMORANDUM OPINION
1988 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 195">*196 STERRETT,
The parties submitted this case fully stipulated pursuant to Rule 122. The stipulation of facts and exhibits attached thereto are incorporated herein by this reference.
1988 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 195">*197 Petitioners Robert D. Horn and Peggy P. Horn were husband and wife during the years in issue and, at the time they filed the petition in this case, resided in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and Shawnee, Oklahoma, respectively. They filed their joint Federal income tax returns for the years in issue with the Office of the Internal Revenue Service in Austin, Texas.
On April 11, 1983, and April 18, 1983, petitioners filed their joint Federal income tax returns for calendar years 1976 and 1977, respectively. Petitioners did not seek an extension of time in which to file these returns. With respect to the 1976 return, there was an underpayment of tax required to be shown on the return in the amount of $ 5,484.23; with respect to the 1977 return, there was an underpayment of tax required to be shown on the return in the amount of $ 8,197. All or part of these underpayments were due to fraud.
On April 11, 1983, and April 18, 1986, respondent assessed additions to petitioners' Federal income taxes for 1976 and 1977, respectively, pursuant to
1988 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 195">*198 In his notice of deficiency, respondent determined that petitioners were liable for an addition to tax pursuant to
*. By order of the Chief Judge, this case was reassigned to the Chief Judge for opinion and decision. ↩
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all sections referred to are sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended and in effect during the years in issue, and all rules referred to are rules of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. ↩
2. The stipulation simply states that "On November 30, 1987 * * * [respondent] initiated the necessary computer action to cause abatement of the
3.
(d) No Delinquency Penalty If Fraud Assessed. -- If any penalty is assessed under subsection (b) (relating to fraud) for an underpayment of tax which is required to be shown on a return, no penalty under