- 71 -
“Taxable income omitted” under the heading “Court’s Findings”.
We hold for respondent as to Kenmore’s fiscal 1980.
B. Gleave
We have set forth our findings as to the amounts of Gleave’s
income supra in tables 8, 9, and 10.
We conclude, and we have found, that Gleave has failed to
carry his burden of proof as to the amounts set forth in the row
“Burden of Proof” in tables 8, 9, and 10.
We hold for respondent in the amounts set forth supra in
tables 8, 9, and 10, in the rows “Income to Gleave” and “Burden
of Proof”, less the amounts of deductions set forth in our
Findings of Fact at note 8 and associated text; we hold for
Gleave in the amounts set forth in tables 8, 9, and 10 in the row
“Not Income to Gleave”.
To take account of the parties’ concessions and the
foregoing,
Decisions will be entered
under Rule 155.20
20 At trial the parties were unsure whether Gleave was
entitled to any dependency deductions for his children for the
years in issue. This matter is to be dealt with in the
computations under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 Last modified: May 25, 2011