- 43 -- 43 - Miscellaneous Deposits The parties agree that the total amounts of miscellaneous deposits that remain at issue for 1989 and 1990 are $83,364 and $41,583.71, respectively. Petitioners agree that those deposits are prima facie evidence of income and that they bear the burden of proving that respondent's determinations of unreported income for the years 1989 and 1990 based on those deposits are errone- ous. See Clayton v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. at 645; DiLeo v. Commissioner, 96 T.C. at 869; Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. at 77. Although petitioners' argument is not altogether clear, they appear to argue that the miscellaneous deposits at issue for 1989 and 1990 do not constitute unreported income for those years because they represent gross receipts derived from the operations of petitioner's sole proprietorship Charles Harp Construction that petitioners reported in Schedule C of their return for each 29(...continued) such an allegation from the complaint in the lawsuit does not establish that those funds are not taxable to petitioners. In fact, with respect to petitioner's deposits during 1989 and 1990 of K & H's construction loan proceeds, the record does not indi- cate that Mr. Kabeiseman had any knowledge at any time throughout the course of the years at issue of petitioner's practice of retaining a portion of those proceeds. Even assuming arguendo that we were to construe the settlement agreement as encompassing a repayment of a portion of K & H's construction loan proceeds, a repayment by petitioner in a year subsequent to the year in which those proceeds were deposited into petitioners' accounts and for which they constitute income to petitioners under the principles of James v. United States, 366 U.S. 213 (1961), would not reduce petitioners' income for the year during which those proceeds were deposited. See Mais v. Commissioner, 51 T.C. 494, 499 (1968).Page: Previous 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011