George J. and Sophia Mantakounis - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          the $105,000 was a loan from J. Mantakounis to petitioners, and             
          not cash that petitioner found in a box.  On July 25, 1997,                 
          petitioners’ attorney produced to Moore a “note”, the $154,000              
          check to J. Mantakounis, and the settlement sheet for the                   
          Springfield property as evidence of the loan.                               
               On April 15, 1999, petitioner met with Appeals Officer                 
          Walter Lyons (Lyons).  At this meeting, petitioner denied that he           
          ever mentioned finding the money in a box in his father’s house.            
          Petitioner stated that J. Mantakounis sold property in Greece and           
          that funds from that sale were loaned to petitioner.  Petitioner            
          first told Lyons that J. Mantakounis loaned him the money in                
          Philadelphia.  He later claimed that his father gave the cash to            
          petitioner in Florida.                                                      
               On January 24, 2001, respondent sent to petitioners a notice           
          of deficiency for 1991.  Respondent determined that the $105,000            
          was unreported income, increasing petitioners’ taxable income               
          accordingly.                                                                
                                       OPINION                                        
          Unreported Income                                                           
               Generally, the taxpayer bears the burden of disproving the             
          Commissioner’s determination.  Rule 142(a); see Welch v.                    
          Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933); Clayton v. Commissioner, 102           
          T.C. 632, 645 (1994).  Petitioners, however, argue that here the            
          burden shifted to respondent under section 7491 because                     






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011