n\a

February 22, 1957MEMORANDUM FOR — The Chief CounselAs stated by the Conference Staff, the principal question to be decided in this case is whether Mr. Miguel Kairuz could be held liable for the payment of the forest charges on the difference between the quantity of timber admittedly sold and the estimated timber yield of private woodlands registered under PWR Nos. 114 and 353. cdtThe Conference Staff contends that the burden of proof is upon this Office to establish the validity and legality of the taxes assessed against the taxpayer. We respectfully disagree with the Staff on this point. There is a presumption of correctness and validity in the assessments made by the Collector and hence, it is incumbent upon the taxpayer to disprove it. Of course, this should not be taken to mean that this Office should make an assessment even if there is no basis at all. Every assessment made by this Office should have a basis both in fact and in law. However, the taxpayer should be required to present proof showing that...