- 3 - a taxpayer has failed to file a return. Generally, a deficiency notice is presumed correct, and the taxpayer has the burden of proving it wrong. See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).1 The only evidence offered by petitioner at trial was his testimony that he filed his return. We are not required to accept petitioner's self- serving testimony, particularly in the absence of corroborating evidence. See Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 74, 77 (1986). If petitioner filed his return, he should have either received a refund or paid an amount due, yet petitioner presented no evidence regarding a refund or a payment. Petitioner attributes his lack of documentary evidence to the 5 years that elapsed between the tax year at issue and his receipt of the notice of deficiency. Petitioner, however, made no attempt to explain why respondent’s deficiency determination is incorrect or provide us with any basis not to uphold it. Accordingly, we find that petitioner did not file his 1994 Federal income tax return and uphold respondent’s determination of a deficiency. Section 6651(a)(1) provides for an addition to tax where a return is not timely filed “unless it is shown that such failure 1 We do not find that the burden-shifting provisions of current sec. 6201(d) or sec. 7491 apply.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011