- 9 -
the determination. See United States v. Janis, 428 U.S. 433,
441-442 (1976); Weimerskirch v. Commissioner, 596 F.2d 358, 360
(9th Cir. 1979), revg. 67 T.C. 672 (1977). The rationale for
this exception is based on the recognized difficulty the taxpayer
bears in proving the nonreceipt of income. See Elkins v. United
States, 364 U.S. 206 (1960); Flores v. United States, 551 F.2d
1169, 1175 (9th Cir. 1977). When the determination is considered
arbitrary and erroneous, the presumption of correctness is
destroyed. See United States v. Janis, supra at 442;
Weimerskirch v. Commissioner, supra.
Petitioner's contention that respondent's determination is
arbitrary and erroneous is without merit. Petitioner stipulated
to the District Court's opinion in Kersting (Consolidated Cases)
and stipulated to nearly the entire record in Kersting
(Consolidated Cases), including voluminous testimony and
exhibits. After an extensive examination of the voluminous
record, the District Court released a detailed 107-page opinion,
and respondent's determination is based squarely thereon.
During trial of this case, petitioner neither presented
witnesses nor made any meaningful attempt to rebut the
overwhelming evidence supporting respondent's determination,
evidence to which petitioner stipulates. Respondent has amply
demonstrated the requisite "predicate evidence" supporting his
determination. Petitioner nonsensically argues the determination
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011