- 28 -
(“The failure of a party to call such available witnesses that
purportedly have knowledge about relevant facts provides
sufficient basis to infer that the testimony of such witnesses
would not have been favorable to the party.”); see also McKay v.
Commissioner, 886 F.2d 1237, 1238 (9th Cir. 1989), affg. 89 T.C.
1063 (1987); Wichita Terminal Elevator Co. v. Commissioner,
6 T.C. 1158, 1165 (1946), affd. 162 F.2d 513 (10th Cir. 1947);
Little v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-270. Petitioner has not
met her burden of proof; accordingly, the $70,000 paid to
Property Resources is taxable to petitioner in 1999.15
2. Taxable Year 2000
Petitioner’s Form 1040 for 2000 reported no income from
National Land Bank. Respondent made adjustments to National Land
Bank’s income using the bank deposits method because respondent
did not receive any audit cooperation or documents from
petitioner for 2000. Using the bank deposits method and the fact
that petitioner had signatory authority over the account at San
15 National Land Bank did not report the $70,000 on its 1999
Form 1065 presumably because Krismon Buttes, at Speck’s request,
reissued the check to Property Resources. However, because the
check was originally issued to Speck in payment of Speck’s
invoice for services rendered and because Speck is a disregarded
entity for Federal tax purposes, the $70,000 is taxable to
petitioner.
Because the parties did not raise the timing issue of
constructive receipt of the $70,000 in the 1998 taxable year when
the original check was made payable to and delivered to Speck,
the Court does not address this issue.
Page: Previous 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011