- 88 - income tax purposes for lack of economic substance. Petitioner bears the burden of proof. See Rule 142(a); Brown v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 968, 998 (1985), affd. sub nom. Sochin v. Commissioner, 843 F.2d 351 (9th Cir. 1988). As discussed in detail below, we shall sustain respondent's adjustments on the ground that the disputed CINS transactions lack economic substance. See ACM Partnership v. Commissioner, 157 F.3d 231 (3d Cir. 1998), affg. in part and revg. in part T.C. Memo. 1997-115, where the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed this Court’s holding that virtually identical CINS transactions arranged by Merrill Lynch lacked economic substance. Based upon our holding in these cases, we need not decide whether Saba and Otrabanda were valid partnerships. Cf. ASA Investerings Partnership v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-305, on appeal to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. I. Evidentiary Matters Prior to trial, petitioner asserted that certain documents in its possession, including the Zelisko memorandum, were privileged and not subject to discovery. After respondent moved to compel production of the documents, the Court ordered petitioner to submit the documents to the Court for in camera review. On August 14, 1998, the Court issued an order holding, among other things, that only limited portions of the ZeliskoPage: Previous 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011