- 19 - Kling v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-78 (“Absent some explanation, a taxpayer's bank deposits represent taxable income. * * * The taxpayer has the burden of proving that the bank deposits came from a nontaxable source.”). Respondent made a prima facie case by identifying deposits to petitioner’s accounts. It was therefore incumbent upon petitioner to show a nontaxable source for the deposits. Petitioner failed to offer credible evidence to show that any of the deposits respondent identified in his bank deposits analysis were from nontaxable sources. Petitioner’s tax adviser, Catherine Carroll (Carroll),5 offered into evidence the front of a check in the amount of $10,892.11. Carroll claimed that the check had been deposited to one of petitioner’s accounts and had 4(...continued) cooperated with reasonable requests by the Secretary for witnesses, information, documents, meetings, and interviews”. Sec. 7491(a)(2)(B). Petitioner did not maintain proper books and records as required by the regulations and did not cooperate with respondent’s reasonable requests for information and documents during the examination. Because petitioner did not satisfy the conditions of sec. 7491(a), he bears the burden of proof with respect to the income tax deficiencies respondent determined. 5Petitioner hired Carroll to provide forensic accounting services and expert testimony in connection with this case. She was not involved in the creation of petitioner’s trusts nor in the preparation of petitioner’s and the trusts’ original Federal income tax returns. At trial, Carroll did submit on behalf of petitioner and the trusts amended Federal income tax returns. Because respondent claimed from the beginning, and petitioner has now conceded, that all trust items are taxable to petitioner, the trust returns and proposed amendments are nullities. Throughout this opinion we will refer to Carroll as petitioner’s “tax adviser”.Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011