- 2 - I.R.C., determination. A determination of whether or not sec. 66(b), I.R.C., applies requires the presentation of different evidence than that necessary to decide the matters described in the notice of deficiency. Held: R's determinations of additional gross receipts and disallowance of deductions are, with certain modifications, upheld. Held, further: Sec. 7522, I.R.C., requires that a notice of deficiency contain a description of the basis for the Commissioner's tax determination. Where R relies on a basis that was not described in the notice of deficiency that requires the presentation of different evidence, it is "new matter" within the meaning of Rule 142(a), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. If the new matter is allowed to be raised, Rule 142(a), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, requires that R bear the burden of proof. The burden of proof regarding application of sec. 66(b), I.R.C., is on R. R failed to meet this burden; therefore, P is entitled to the benefits of California's community property law for the taxable year 1992. David M. Kirsch, for petitioner. Dale A. Zusi, for respondent. OPINION RUWE, Judge: Respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner's Federal income taxes, an addition to tax, and accuracy-related penalties as follows: Addition to Tax Accuracy-related Penalty Year Deficiency Sec. 6651(a)(1) Sec. 6662(a) 1990 $155,096 -- $31,019 1991 165,529 -- 33,106 1992 138,529 $34,632 27,706Page: 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