- 11 - receipts on the daily sales summaries. In an interview with a revenue agent, petitioner estimated that he could have understated the gross receipts for Gene’s by as much as $15,000 per month. As of the time of trial, petitioner was not able to produce most of the cash register tapes for Gene’s, and no records of cash balances, cash receipts, cash expenditures, or inventories were maintained except for a few invoices for cash purchases of inventory. Because the records for Gene’s could not be reconciled with petitioners’ income tax returns, respondent reconstructed the gross receipts of Gene’s by means of the bank deposits method coupled with the cash expenditures method. The bank deposits and cash expenditures methods are acknowledged methods of reconstructing income. See Parks v. Commissioner, supra; Nicholas v. Commissioner, 70 T.C. 1057, 1065 (1978). Respondent’s bank deposits analysis reflects that petitioners had substantial unreported income from Gene’s business operations during 1991 and 1992. Gene’s was petitioners’ only source of business income. Respondent’s agent examined petitioners’ records and also performed an analysis of bank deposits for the years in issue. The bank deposits analysis was accomplished by totaling the deposits made to petitioners’ 5(...continued) percentage markup method of reconstruction is one whereby an established base, such as cost of goods sold, is marked up to reconstruct gross sales or gross receipts.Page: 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