- 9 -
exchange for improving Ms. Choe's properties, petitioner was
entitled to receive the return of the money he spent to improve
the property and half of any profit on the sale of each improved
parcel. Petitioner, however, did not account to Ms. Choe for
amounts he spent to improve the properties.
Petitioner told Mr. Jung that none of Ms. Choe's properties
were sold during the years in issue. In 1989, the property
located at 11031 Burnet Avenue was sold for $140,000. This
property was purchased for $90,000. Petitioner had been in
charge of the sale. Ms. Choe did not receive any of the $50,000
difference between the cost and sale price of the property.
Petitioner did not report any gain or loss from the sale of real
property nor any income from his real estate activity on his
returns.
OPINION
Unreported Income
Petitioner argues that respondent bears the burden of proof.
Petitioner contends that respondent has not proven by clear and
convincing evidence that the bank deposits in 1988 were not
reported in income and that the deposits in 1988, 1989, and 1990
from businesses which did not issue Forms 1099 are medical
practice income.
The Commissioner's determinations generally are presumed
5 (...continued)
structures.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011