Oliver E. Stubblefield - Page 13

                                   - NEXTRECORD  -                                    
          respect of petitioner's checking and savings accounts with that             
          institution, corroborates respondent's determination of net                 
          deposits5 and supports respondent's bank deposits analysis in               
          general.                                                                    
               After analyzing petitioner's bank deposits, respondent                 
          proceeded with her determination of unreported income as follows:           
          (1) Unreported self-employment income                                       
          net taxable deposits                                                        
          (a) checking account              $14,340.00                                
          (b) savings account                                                         
          total deposits    3,456.07                                                  
          less: interest     -626.07     2,830.00                                     
          17,170.00                                                                   
          less: reported gross receipts          -4,500.00      $12,670.00            
          (2) Unreported interest income                                              
          total interest income                      626.07                           
          less: reported interest income            -100.00         526.07            
          Total                                                        13,196.07      

                                       OPINION                                        
               We begin with a fundamental principle of tax litigation,               
          namely, that, as a general rule, the Commissioner's                         
          determinations are presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the             
          burden of proving that those determinations are erroneous.  Rule            
          142(a); INDOPCO Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992);               
          Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).                               
               We think that the foregoing principle is applicable in the             
          present case for two reasons.  First, the record conclusively               

          5 Although respondent's analysis focuses on the "net                        
          deposits" to petitioner's bank accounts, the documentary evidence           
          demonstrates that petitioner never received any cash back when he           
          made deposits.  Thus, there is no difference between gross                  
          deposits and net deposits.                                                  




Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011