- 5 -
At calendar call, petitioner for the first time disputed
receiving the income from Dynamex or attaching the Form 1099 to
his 2000 return. At trial, petitioner did not present evidence
with respect to any factual issue relevant to ascertaining his
liability for income tax for 2000.4 Petitioner merely objected
to documents respondent wished to submit, and we received, as
evidence. As petitioner presented no credible evidence, he bears
the burden of proof.5
B. Gross Income
Petitioner conceded receiving wage income from PEI. The
issue is whether petitioner received gross income from Dynamex.
Section 61 defines gross income as all income from whatever
source derived. Gross income includes compensation for services.
Sec. 61(a)(1).
Respondent submitted petitioner’s 2000 return, which
included the Form 1099 that was attached to the 2000 return
(listing $29,490.83 in income paid to petitioner from Dynamex),
and business records of Dynamex establishing the payments Dynamex
4 Petitioner was not present at the calendar call or trial.
The four oral stipulations of fact Mr. Hause agreed to at trial
were: (1) Petitioner’s Social Security number and petitioner was
a citizen of the United States; (2) petitioner’s residence at the
time he filed the petition; (3) petitioner timely filed his 2000
return; and (4) during 2000 petitioner received $1,414.56 in wage
income from PEI.
5 We note, however, that our resolution of this issue does
not depend on which party bears the burden of proof.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011