- 10 - deficiencies is incorrect. See Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). A. Petitioners' Income It is a taxpayer's responsibility to maintain adequate books and records sufficient to establish his or her income. See sec. 6001; DiLeo v. Commissioner, 96 T.C. 858, 867 (1991), affd. 959 F.2d 16 (2d Cir. 1992). When a taxpayer fails to maintain adequate records, the Commissioner may determine income under the bank deposits method. DiLeo v. Commissioner, supra at 867. A bank deposit is prima facie evidence of income. Id. at 868; Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 74, 77 (1986); Estate of Mason v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. at 656; see also Hague Estate v. Commissioner, 132 F.2d 775, 777-778 (2d Cir. 1943), affg. 45 B.T.A. 104 (1941). The bank deposits method of reconstruction assumes that all money deposited into a taxpayer's account is taxable as income unless the taxpayer can show a nontaxable source for the income. See Price v. United States, 335 F.2d 671, 677 (5th Cir. 1964); DiLeo v. Commissioner, supra at 868. The use of the bank deposits method for computing income has long been sanctioned by the courts. DiLeo v. Commissioner, supra at 867; Estate of Mason v. Commissioner, supra at 656. The fact that the Commissioner was not completely correct does not invalidate the method employed. Marcello v. Commissioner, 380 F.2d 494 (5th Cir. 1967), affg. in part andPage: 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