- 6 -
apartment "shall be used solely for private residential
purposes." There is no evidence that Ruby was a party to any of
the three leases or that she received any exception from the
lessor to use the apartment for her business purposes.
We also observe that the addresses listed on Preston's and
Ruby's 1994 Forms W-2 are different. No Forms W-2 for 1993 for
either Preston or Ruby were in the record. Ruby explained that
the address Preston used was a post office box and that it was
not Preston's residence. However, Ruby admitted that the post
office box is located near the apartment that Preston rented. We
believe that Preston rented the apartment for his own personal
purposes and not for Ruby's beauty sales business. Any purported
use of the apartment by Ruby is not supported by the evidence in
the record. Thus, we conclude that petitioners are not entitled
to deduct rental payments in the amount of $8,028 for each of the
years 1993 and 1994.
At trial, Ruby raised for the first time another new issue
with respect to whether petitioners should be allowed to deduct
the amounts of $4,140 and $4,460 for 1993 and 1994, respectively,
for "other expenses" for casual labor incurred on behalf of
Ruby's rooming house. Again, as to this second new issue,
petitioners did not claim any such expenses for casual labor as
deductions with respect to the rooming house on the Schedules C
for either year at issue.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011