- 6 -
return, she claimed deductions for both mortgage interest and
real estate taxes. Ms. Richards initially claimed dependency
exemption deductions on her 1997 return for Brigid and Shannon,
but she did not claim dependency exemption deductions on her
amended return.
After trial, respondent filed (1) a motion to file an answer
to conform the pleadings to the proof, which the Court granted,
and (2) an answer to amended petition.
Discussion
As a preliminary matter, we note that petitioner conceded
the adjustment determined in the notice of deficiency.
After the issuance of the notice of deficiency, in the amended
petition and at trial, petitioner raised the issues concerning
his Schedule C expenses and his increased alimony deduction;
accordingly, petitioner bears the burden of proof on those
issues.2 Rule 142(a)(1).
In his answer to amended petition, respondent denied the
allegations in the amended petition and made affirmative
allegations that petitioner was not entitled to dependency
2 Sec. 7491 does not apply to shift the burden of proof to
respondent on these issues because petitioner has neither alleged
that sec. 7491 is applicable nor established that he complied
with the requirements of sec. 7491(a)(2)(A) and (B) to
substantiate items, maintain required records, and fully
cooperate with respondent’s reasonable requests.
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