Patmon v. Commissioner
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DINAN,
By statutory notice*491 of deficiency dated July 5, 1984, respondent determined a deficiency in, and additions to, petitioner's Federal income tax as follows:
| Additions to Tax | |||
| Year | Deficiency | Section 6653(a) | Section 6651(a)(1) |
| 1979 | $ 6,318.00 | $ 315.90 | $ 1,579.50 |
By Order dated July 14, 1987, we limited the issues to be tried to whether petitioner is entitled to a Schedule C loss deduction with respect to master recordings.
At the trial of this case, we modified our Order of July 14, 1987, to include as an issue for decision whether petitioner is entitled to investment tax credits in 1979.
When he filed his petition in this case, petitioner resided in Detroit, Michigan.
Petitioner contends that he is entitled to depreciation deductions pursuant to section 167 with respect to master recordings and to investment tax credits with respect to master recordings. This case was called for trial in Detroit, Michigan, on December 10, 1987. Although petitioner was present at trial, he did not testify.
The burden of proof in this case is upon petitioner.
Petitioner has completely failed to submit*492 any evidence to carry his burden in this case. Despite the Court's repeated admonitions to petitioner that he proceed to address the merits of his case, he declined to do so. We, therefore, find for respondent on the depreciation and investment tax credits issues. Because of our earlier orders limiting the issues,
Footnotes
1. All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended and in effect for the year in issue. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.↩
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1989 T.C. Memo. 487 (Patmon v. Commissioner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.