Diane and Frank Burkley - Page 9




                                        - 8 -                                          
                                      Discussion                                       
               In general, the Commissioner’s determination as set forth in            
          a notice of deficiency is presumed correct.  Welch v. Helvering,             
          290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).  In pertinent part, Rule 142(a)(1)                 
          provides the general rule that the burden of proof shall be on               
          the taxpayer.  In certain circumstances, however, if the taxpayer            
          introduces credible evidence with respect to any factual issue               
          relevant to ascertaining the proper tax liability, section 7491              
          shifts the burden of proof to the Commissioner.  Sec. 7491(a)(1);            
          Rule 142(a)(2).  Petitioners did not argue that section 7491 is              
          applicable, and they did not establish that the burden of proof              
          should shift to respondent.  Petitioners, therefore, bear the                
          burden of proving that respondent’s determinations as set forth              
          in the notice of deficiency are erroneous.  See Rule 142(a);                 
          Welch v. Helvering, supra at 115.                                            
               With respect, however, to the issues raised in respondent’s             
          answer, which increased the amount of the deficiency, Rule                   
          142(a)(1) places the burden of proof on respondent.                          
               Finally, with respect to any penalty or addition to tax,                
          section 7491(c) places the burden of production on the                       
          Commissioner.                                                                
          Schedule E Expenses                                                          
               Petitioners maintain that they are entitled to deduct                   
          $24,788 in Schedule E expenses for the South Green Street                    







Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next 

Last modified: March 27, 2008