Peter and Mary Possas - Page 9




                                        - 8 -                                         
          evidentiary foundation linking the taxpayer to the alleged                  
          income-producing activity.’”  Blohm v. Commissioner, 994 F.2d               
          1542, 1549 (11th Cir. 1993) (quoting Weimerskirch v.                        
          Commissioner, 596 F.2d 358, 362 (9th Cir. 1979), revg. 67 T.C.              
          672 (1977)), affg. T.C. Memo. 1991-636.  The Commissioner need              
          only provide a minimal showing.  Id.  Once the Court determines             
          that the Commissioner provided the minimal evidentiary showing,             
          the taxpayer then bears the burden of proving that the notice of            
          deficiency is arbitrary or erroneous.  Gatlin v. Commissioner,              
          754 F.2d 921, 923 (11th Cir. 1985) (citing Jackson v.                       
          Commissioner, 73 T.C. 394, 401 (1979)), affg. T.C. Memo. 1982-              
          489.                                                                        
               Section 7491, enacted as part of the Internal Revenue                  
          Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206,              
          sec. 3001, 112 Stat. 726, which can shift the burden of proof               
          from the taxpayer to the Commissioner, is not applicable to this            
          case because petitioners’ audit commenced in April 1998, which              
          predates July 22, 1998, the effective date of section 7491.                 
               Petitioners had two main sources of income, Mr. Possas’s               
          wages for his position as a manager and Mrs. Possas’s                       
          hairdressing activity.  Because petitioners kept no records as to           
          their income or expenses from the hairdressing activity, they               
          estimated these amounts on their returns.  We find that                     
          respondent has provided the required evidentiary foundation                 






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011