- 30 -
effective tax administration offer-in-compromise. See Keller v.
Commissioner, supra.
2. Information Sufficient for the Court To Review
Respondent’s Determination
Petitioners argue that respondent failed to provide the
Court with sufficient information “so that this Court can conduct
a thorough, probing, and in-depth review of respondent’s
determinations.” Petitioners’ argument is without merit.
Generally, a taxpayer bears the burden of proving the
Commissioner’s determinations incorrect. Rule 142(a)(1); Welch
v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).14 The burden was on
petitioners to show that respondent abused his discretion. The
burden was not on respondent to provide enough information to
show that he did not abuse his discretion. Nevertheless, we find
that we had more than sufficient information to review
respondent’s determination.
3. Deadline for Submission of Information
Petitioners argue that Ms. Cochran abused her discretion by
not allowing their counsel additional time to submit information
14 While sec. 7491 shifts the burden of proof and/or the
burden of production to the Commissioner in certain
circumstances, this section is not applicable in this case
because respondent’s examination of petitioners’ returns did not
commence after July 22, 1998. See Internal Revenue Service
Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, Pub. L. 105-206, sec.
3001(c), 112 Stat. 727.
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011