- 33 -
8. Petitioners' Bankruptcy
After submission of these cases, petitioners filed a
petition for bankruptcy on July 17, 1996. By order of the
bankruptcy court dated October 4, 1996, the stay was lifted,
permitting the Tax Court to proceed in this matter.
OPINION
1. Dismissal
With respect to the deficiencies determined in the notice of
deficiency, respondent moved to dismiss these cases for
petitioner's failure properly to prosecute. The primary basis of
the motion is that petitioner failed to appear at the scheduled
trial of this case. Respondent's motion to dismiss was limited
to the deficiencies determined by respondent in the notice of
deficiency upon which petitioner bears the burden of proof. Rule
142(a). We took this motion under advisement. Because we find,
based on the extensive record, that petitioner has failed to
carry his burden of proof, we will deny respondent's motion as
moot.
2. Burden of Proof
As we have indicated with respect to the deficiencies
determined in the notice of deficiency, petitioner bears the
burden of proving that those determinations are erroneous. Rule
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011