Doyal v. C. I. R

2 Citing cases

  1. Leathers v. Leathers

    CIVIL ACTION No. 08-1213 (D. Kan. May. 3, 2013)   Cited 5 times
    Noting that unsigned, unsworn declarations are not properly considered on summary judgment

    Ronald next claims the IRS calculation of assessments was arbitrary and erroneous. Once the IRS shows an evidentiary foundation for the assessment, as it has done here, the taxpayer may overcome the presumption of correctness that attaches to it by citing proof that the assessment is arbitrary and erroneous. See United States v. Gosnell, 961 F.2d 1518, 1520 (10th Cir. 1992); Jones v. C.I.R., 903 F.2d 1301, 1304 (10th Cir. 1990) (citing United States v. Janis, 428 U.S. 433, 442 (1976)); Doyal v. Comm'r, 616 F.2d 1191, 1192 (10th Cir. 1980) (the only exception to the general rule concerning the burden of proof is when the taxpayer shows the IRS's deficiency determination is arbitrary and excessive). Among other things, Ronald claims the IRS arbitrarily assessed self-employment taxes on royalty income, failed to deduct the cost basis of property in determining capital gain, improperly imposed penalties for failing to pay estimated taxes, improperly failed to apply a carry-forward loss from a prior return, and improperly assessed short-term instead of long-term capital gain rates.

  2. Harrington v. Comm'r

    T.C. Memo. 2021-95 (U.S.T.C. Jul. 26, 2021)   Cited 2 times

    Once the Commissioner has established some evidentiary foundation, the burden of proof shifts to the taxpayer to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the Commissioner's determinations are arbitrary or erroneous. See Erickson v. Commissioner, 937 F.2d 1548, 1551-1552 (10th Cir. 1991), aff'g T.C. Memo. 1989-552; Doyal v. Commissioner, 616 F.2d 1191, 1192 (10th Cir. 1980), aff'g T.C. Memo. 1978-307. To satisfy his burden respondent introduced extensive banking records obtained during the examination.