Betty June Dykstra and Pieter Dykstra - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         

          lien filed against their interest and, therefore, were paid for             
          petitioners' benefit.                                                       
               Petitioners' only argument is that Conoco paid Lauck in                
          excess of the mechanic's lien and that Lauck never remitted the             
          excess to petitioners.  Petitioners presented no evidence at                
          trial as to the amount of Lauck's lien.  Additionally,                      
          petitioners failed to establish the exact amounts Lauck received            
          from Conoco in satisfaction of Lauck's lien.  Petitioners have              
          failed to prove that respondent's determination is incorrect.3              
          See Rule 142(a).  Accordingly, we find that petitioners had                 
          unreported income from Conoco of $2,398 and $2,031 in 1994 and              
          1995, respectively.                                                         
          Disallowed Itemized Deductions                                              
               In the notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed certain             
          itemized deductions totaling $17,872 claimed by petitioners on              
          their 1994 return.                                                          

               3  We note that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth                
          Circuit, to which this case is appealable, has held that in order           
          for the presumption of correctness to attach to the notice of               
          deficiency in unreported income cases, respondent must come                 
          forward with substantive evidence establishing "some evidentiary            
          foundation" linking the taxpayer to the income-producing                    
          activity.  Weimerskirch v. Commissioner, 596 F.2d 358, 361-362              
          (9th Cir. 1979), revg. 67 T.C. 672 (1977); see also sec.                    
          6201(d)(as amended).  Based on the evidence presented at trial,             
          including Mr. Dykstra's testimony and documentary evidence, we              
          conclude that respondent has adequately shown a connection                  
          between Mr. Dykstra and the oil lease.  Respondent's                        
          determination, therefore, is entitled to the presumption of                 

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011