- 10 - thereunder the burden of proof is on respondent as to the treatment of the $4,950 denominated as interest. Respondent argues that the letter to petitioner dated July 2, 1998, was mailed on that date, that the letter effectively commenced on that date the examination of petitioner’s 1996 Federal income tax, 20 days prior to the effective date of section 7491, and therefore that for 1996 the burden of proof is on petitioner. Neither the Code nor the regulations define when an examination will be regarded as having commenced for purposes of section 7491. Respondent points us to the legislative history of section 7491 and to Rev. Proc. 97-27, 1997-1 C.B. 680. The legislative history explains the following with regard to what constitutes an examination for purposes of section 7491: An audit is not the only event that would be considered an examination for purposes of this provision. For example, the matching of an information return against amounts reported on a tax return is intended to be an examination for purposes of this provision. Similarly, the review of a claim for refund prior to issuing that refund is also intended to be an examination for purposes of this provision. [H. Conf. Rept. 105-599, supra at 242, 1998-3 C.B. at 996.] In Rev. Proc. 97-27, 1997-1 C.B. at 683, for purposes of a change in accounting method under section 481, respondent takes the position that any contact by respondent to schedule anPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011