- 8 -
section 61(a)(4). Also, it has long been established that income
includes “undeniable accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and
over which the taxpayers have complete dominion.” Commissioner
v. Glenshaw Glass Co., 348 U.S. 426, 431 (1955).
As in Hernandez I, petitioner has failed to bring a single
witness to the courtroom to corroborate his story. Moreover,
petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the amounts received
from the redemption of the tax certificates were paid to the
copayees. Petitioner has also failed to introduce any evidence
that shows that the copayees included any of these amounts on
their Federal income tax returns. Furthermore, petitioner
deposited these amounts in his own bank account. Based upon
these facts, we conclude that petitioner exercised dominion and
control over the interest income he received from the redemption
of the tax certificates.
For the foregoing reasons, and following our recent opinion
in Hernandez I involving the same taxpayer and closely similar
circumstances, we sustain in its entirety respondent’s adjustment
to petitioner’s income for 1994.
Section 6662(a) imposes a penalty of 20 percent of the
portion of the underpayment that is attributable to negligence or
disregard of rules or regulations. See sec. 6662(b)(1).
Negligence is the lack of due care or failure to do what a
reasonable and ordinarily prudent person would do under the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011