Therefore, the burden of proof is properly upon petitioner in this proceeding. As to the constitutional application of the statute, petitioner has provided no basis for concluding that taxpayers who concede the liability of an assessment are similarly situated to those who file a petition disputing an assessment. The Notice was issued to petitioner on the basis that decedent was a resident individual of New York City. In an attempt to establish that this was incorrect, the burden was upon petitioner to demonstrate that decedent was domiciled outside of New York. However, there was absolutely no evidence presented to demonstrate that decedent was domiciled outside New York during the years in question.
Petitioner cites to the bill of particulars as proof of certain facts.
However, the bill of particulars was prepared by Kathleen Campanile who testified that she did not k ow decedent during the audit period. Furthermore, petitioner failed to introduce any documents relied on by Ms. Campanile in her preparation of the bill of particulars. Accordingly, the statements contained therein are given little weight. Where, as here, petitioner has filed to introduce any evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness, the issuance of the assessment provides the rational basis for the assessment. Matter of Scarpulla v. State Tax Commn.