Kamil F. and Nagwa Gowni - Page 45

                                       - 45 -                                         
          however, to address these errors and to provide alternative                 
          analyses.  The errors do not invalidate respondent’s use of the             
          bank deposits method in these cases, which was necessitated by              
          petitioners’ failure to maintain adequate books and records for             
          themselves as well as for the corporations that they owned and              
          controlled.  Petitioners’ vague assertions, unsupported by                  
          corroborating records or documents, are not reliable or                     
          persuasive.  If documentation existed, it should have been                  
          produced in response to discovery and/or exchanged with                     
          respondent in accordance with the Court’s Standing Pretrial Order           
          and the Court’s Orders of August 14, 2003.  Therefore, except to            
          the extent discussed above, respondent’s determinations of                  
          petitioners’ income for the years in issue are sustained.                   
          Additions to Tax and Accuracy-Related Penalties                             
               Respondent determined an addition to tax under section                 
          6651(a)(1) with respect to the Mansours for 1996 and with respect           
          to the Gownis for 1999 as a result of their failure to file                 
          timely returns for those years.  Petitioners have presented                 
          neither evidence nor argument regarding the addition to tax.                
               The Commissioner has the burden of production under section            
          7491(c) and must come forward with sufficient evidence indicating           
          that it is appropriate to impose the penalty.  Respondent has met           
          that burden of production in these cases by showing that the                
          returns were late.  Respondent determined the addition to tax for           
          late filing for the Mansours because the Mansours’ 1996 return              





Page:  Previous  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011