- 9 -
We said early on: “By design the statute contemplates the
keeping by a taxpayer of accounts and records from which his
correct income can be determined, and in the absence of such
books of account the respondent must determine or verify his
income from the records or sources that are available.” Estate
of Hague v. Commissioner, 45 B.T.A. 104, 109-110 (1941), affd.
132 F.2d 775 (2d Cir. 1943), affd. sub nom. Commissioner v.
Uniacke, 132 F.2d 781 (2d Cir. 1942). See sec. 6001; sec.
1.6001-1(a), Income Tax Regs. Petitioner did not keep adequate
records of her rent receipts. She failed to provide the Appeals
officer or tax auditor with complete information concerning her
bank accounts. She provided to them unverifiable explanations as
to the claimed gifts from her children. Her explanations to them
of nontaxable sources for the cash transactions were confusing
and contradictory. The records and sources available during the
examination were inadequate to explain the cash transactions as
deriving from nontaxable sources, and respondent adjusted
(increased) petitioner’s gross income to reflect his
determination that no nontaxable sources existed.
3. Burden of Proof
The general rule is that the burden of proof is upon
petitioner, see Rule 142(a), which she must carry by a
preponderance of the evidence, e.g., Schaffer v. Commissioner,
779 F.2d 849, 858 (2d Cir. 1985), affg. in part and remanding in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011