- 5 -
OPINION
Unreported Gross Income
Respondent determined that petitioner had unreported gross
income from his dental practice, based on the excess of the
amounts petitioner reported on his applications for the subject
years over the amounts he reported on his delinquent Federal
income tax returns. Petitioner’s admissions on the applications
provide at least a minimal evidentiary foundation, if any be
required, supporting respondent’s determinations of unreported
income. Cf. Williams v. Commissioner, 999 F.2d 760, 764 (4th
Cir. 1993), affg. T.C. Memo. 1992-153. The burden of proof is on
petitioner to show that respondent’s determinations are
incorrect. See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111,
115 (1933); Williams v. Commissioner, supra.3
In his petition, petitioner states that respondent’s
determinations are in error because the “Gross receipts reported
to Town of Abingdon have been determined to be incorrect.”
Petitioner has offered no testimony or other evidence to support
3 In certain circumstances, if the taxpayer introduces
credible evidence with respect to any factual issue relevant to
ascertaining the proper tax liability, sec. 7491 places the
burden of proof on respondent. See sec. 7491(a); Rule 142(a)(2).
Sec. 7491 is effective with respect to court proceedings arising
in connection with examinations commencing after July 22, 1998.
See Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of
1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec. 3001(c)(2), 112 Stat. 726.
Petitioner does not contend, nor is there evidence, that his
examination commenced after July 22, 1998, or that sec. 7491
applies in this case.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011