- 4 -
Jackson indicating that a taxable distribution was made to
petitioner of $8,000.
Petitioner’s Federal income tax return for the taxable year
2000 was signed and submitted to the Internal Revenue Service on
November 16, 2004. Petitioner did not request an extension of
time to file his 2000 return. On the return, petitioner reported
$28,102 on line 16a (total pensions & annuities) and $8,000 on
line 16b (taxable amount).3 Petitioner further claimed a
dependency exemption deduction for Lupe Chitwood.
Discussion
Generally, the burden of proof is on the taxpayer. Rule
142(a)(1). However, if the taxpayer satisfies the limitations
under section 7491(a)(2) and introduces credible evidence with
3 The record is not clear as to the source of the amounts
reported on the return or the exact adjustments made by
respondent. It appears that the $28,102 reported on line 16a is
the sum of (1) the disability pension from CFITF of $20,102 and
(2) the annuity distribution from Jackson of $8,000. While it
appears that petitioner reported the $8,000 distribution from
Jackson as taxable income on line 16b, the record does not
contain a schedule of adjustments which would normally be
attached to the notice of deficiency. In his pretrial
memorandum, respondent lists as an issue the question of whether
petitioner received a taxable distribution of $8,000 from
Jackson. Respondent further indicates that the issue was
conceded by petitioner.
At trial petitioner initially appeared to agree with the
concession. He later explained, however, that he agreed that he
received the $8,000 distribution from Jackson but that he did not
agree that the distribution represented taxable income. Thus, we
consider whether the $8,000 distribution received from Jackson
represents taxable income.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011