Alec Jeffrey Megibow - Page 14

                                                - 14 -                                                  
            taxable income in the years received."  Beaver v. Commissioner,                             
            supra at 91.                                                                                
                  Petitioner has failed to prove that the $30,000 was a loan.                           
            Petitioner has provided us with little evidence to support his                              
            claim that the $30,000 was a loan.  We are not persuaded by                                 
            Mr. Bentley’s testimony that he prepared a Form 1099,                                       
            Miscellaneous Income, showing zero miscellaneous income paid by                             
            Radiology Affiliates, to correct “the 1099 which was * * *                                  
            erroneously submitted by the employer contemporaneously with the                            
            transaction”.  Petitioner has failed to produce any loan                                    
            documents or testimony of his own or of anyone from Radiology                               
            Affiliates to substantiate his claim of a loan.  This failure to                            
            produce such evidence leads to the inference that either such                               
            evidence does not exist or would be negative to petitioner.                                 
            Wichita Terminal Elevator Co. v. Commissioner, 6 T.C. 1158, 1165                            
            (1946) ("the failure of a party to introduce evidence within his                            
            possession and which, if true, would be favorable to him, gives                             
            rise to the presumption that if produced it would be                                        
            unfavorable"), affd. 162 F.2d 513 (10th Cir. 1947).  Petitioner                             
            has not given us any reason to believe that the $30,000 was a                               
            loan, and thus, we find that the $30,000 payment was an item of                             
            gross income for 1993.                                                                      
                  Respondent’s determination of a deficiency is sustained to                            
            the extent respondent included the $30,000 payment as gross                                 
            income.                                                                                     




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011