- 13 -
above before the time to assess tax had expired under the 3-year
rule of section 6501(a) or under previous extensions.3
3. Conclusion
We conclude that respondent timely sent the notice of
deficiency.
B. Whether Respondent’s Determination of the Amount of
Petitioners’ Income for 1995-97 Was Correct
1. Whether Petitioners Had Unreported Income in 1995-97 in
the Amounts Respondent Determined
Respondent determined that petitioners had unreported income
of $103,141 in 1995, $6,671 in 1996, and $467 in 1997. Of the
$103,141 amount for 1995, petitioners concede that $43,822 is
income, and respondent concedes that $10,200 is not income. With
respect to the remaining $49,119 for 1995, respondent contends
that $39,469 is unreported income from layaway sales completed in
1995 and that $9,650 is unreported income that petitioners used
to buy inventory. Respondent also contends that petitioners had
unreported income from layaway sales of $6,671 in 1996 and $467
in 1997.
a. Burden of Proof With Respect to Respondent’s
Deficiency Determination
The burden of proving a factual issue relating to tax
liability shifts to the Commissioner under certain circumstances.
3 We do not decide herein whether it was necessary for the
corporation to agree to extend the time to assess tax. See
Bufferd v. Commissioner, 506 U.S. 523, 533 (1993).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011