- 6 - Commissioner, 102 T.C. 632, 645 (1994); Parks v. Commissioner, supra; Estate of Mason v. Commissioner, supra. Furthermore, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, to which this case is appealable, has accepted the bank deposit method of income reconstruction. Bevan v. Commissioner, 472 F.2d 1381 (6th Cir. 1973), affg. per order T.C. Memo. 1971-312; see also Woods v. Commissioner, 929 F.2d 702 (6th Cir. 1991), affg. without published opinion T.C. Memo. 1989-611. In challenging respondent's income reconstruction, petitioners introduced evidence that was intended to corroborate their claim that the deposits were due to nontaxable sources. This evidence primarily consists of their testimony, bank account statements, credit card statements, and canceled checks. Upon review of the evidence presented, we are persuaded that the source of certain amounts of the deposits were from nontaxable income items, as set forth below. At trial, respondent stressed the fact that petitioner was unable to exactly match his nontaxable payments received with specific bank deposits. Petitioner is not required to directly match nontaxable funds to deposits. If the funds are nontaxable, they are removed from the unreported income determined by respondent. A. 1991 Except for the following amounts, we hold the deposits are income to petitioners subject to tax pursuant to section 61(a).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011