Jonathan B. Geftman - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          December 31, 1985.  Petitioner did not file a Federal income tax            
          return for his 1985 taxable year.  Respondent determined that all           
          $46,936 of petitioner's distribution was includable in his gross            
          income.  Respondent's determination is based on an "indirect                
          method".5                                                                   
                                       OPINION                                        
          A.  Income Tax on Distribution to Petitioner                                
               The primary issues we must decide are whether and to what              
          extent Trust C's distribution of $46,936 to petitioner during               
          1985 is includable in his gross income for that year.  Respondent           
          determined that the whole of the distribution was includable in             
          gross income because Trust C had sufficient DNI for its taxable             
          year ended February 28, 1985, as indicated on its Schedule K-1,             
          Beneficiary's Share of Income, Deductions, Credits, etc.                    
          Respondent's determination is presumed correct, and the burden is           
          on petitioner to disprove her determination.6  Rule 142(a);                 
          Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933); Laird v.                      
          Commissioner, 85 F.2d 598, 599 (3d Cir. 1935), affg. 29 B.T.A.              
          196 (1933).  Petitioner contends that Trust C's distribution to             
          him is not includable in his 1985 gross income because Trust C              

               5 The parties have not explained respondent's indirect                 
          method.  The record indicates that respondent treated all of the            
          checks distributed to petitioner as taxable to him.                         
               6 Petitioner alleges that the burden is on respondent                  
          because respondent's reliance upon the Schedule K-1 is arbitrary            
          and erroneous.  We disagree.  The burden of proof is on                     
          petitioner.                                                                 




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