Bruce L. Helmich - Page 7
Legal Research Home >
US Tax Court > 2001 > Bruce L. Helmich - Page 7
- 6 -
that he had never really received the money and told respondent
the same story he reiterated in court. At trial, petitioner
claimed that he erred in writing the three letters to the
Internal Revenue service.
In addition to his testimony, petitioner provided 4 months
of bank records to support his position that he did not receive
the $10,638. Petitioner's bank records show that $10,638 was not
deposited into his bank account in a 4-month period. They do not
establish that petitioner did not receive the money. At trial,
petitioner contended that he never received the $10,638.
Respondent contended that the letters written by petitioner are
proof that he received the income and that the $10,638 must be
included in petitioner's gross income under section 61(a)(1).
A statutory notice of deficiency ordinarily carries with it
a presumption of correctness. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering,
290 U.S. 111 (1933). Because of this presumption, taxpayers
generally, at least initially, have the burden of proof and the
burden of going forward with the evidence. Cebollero v.
Commissioner, 967 F.2d 986, 991 (4th Cir. 1992), affg. T.C. Memo.
1990-618; see also sec. 7491.
Under section 6201(d), if the taxpayer in a court proceeding
asserts a reasonable dispute with respect to the income reported
on an information return, and fully cooperates with the
Commissioner, then the Commissioner shall have the burden of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011