- 11 -
failed to meet his burden, it is unnecessary for us to decide
whether petitioners’ liabilities on the calculation date were
greater than the amount respondent conceded.
Conclusion
Because he introduced a new matter, respondent has the
burden under Rule 142(a) of proving that petitioners were
insolvent. Rule 142(a). Respondent failed to meet that burden.
We therefore hold that no COD income is includable in
petitioners’ gross income for the year in suit. In addition,
because we find there is no COD income, there is no addition to
tax.
To reflect petitioners’ concession of the dividend income,
and the foregoing,
Decision will be
entered under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Last modified: May 25, 2011