- 13 - bank deposits and cash expenditure method to reconstruct petitioner's income and to determine that petitioner had unreported income for the 1993 taxable year.9 The reconstruction is especially reliable in the present case because petitioner either stipulated or verified through her testimony the amount of deposits made to her bank accounts and the amount of cash that she expended during the 1993 calendar year. Generally, respondent's determination in a statutory notice of deficiency is entitled to a presumption of correctness. Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). The fact that respondent's revised reconstruction reduces the amount of petitioner's unreported income does not affect the presumption of correctness attached to respondent's original determination of petitioner's tax deficiency, to the extent not reduced by respondent's revision. Gobins v. Commissioner, 18 T.C. 1159, 1168-1169 (1952), affd. per curiam 217 F.2d 952 (9th Cir. 1954). Petitioner does not argue that respondent's determination is not entitled to a presumption of correctness.10 Instead, 8(...continued) all such expenses, except depreciation, as cash expenditures for purposes of reconstructing petitioner's income. 9 Respondent's reconstruction of income is a revised version of the Tax Auditor's reconstruction that was attached to the statutory notice of deficiency. Respondent's revised reconstruction determines petitioner to have less unreported income than the original reconstruction. See supra pp. 8-9. 10 In cases of unreported income, the Court of Appeals for (continued...)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