- 13 -
deduction.
The burden is on petitioners to prove entitlement to a
deduction. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111 (1933).
Petitioner Bui presented the only testimony with respect to this
issue. Petitioner Bui testified that she rented six sewing
machines from Mr. Tran Trung for $600 per month, totaling $7,200
for the taxable year. Petitioner Bui further testified that all
rental payments were made in cash and that she did not maintain
any record or other written documentation of the payments.
Petitioner Bui argues that the rental expense is satisfactorily
evidenced by a photographic copy of a document entitled
"Equipments [sic] Rental Agreement".2
Respondent objects to the authenticity of this document,
contending that it appears to have been prepared after the fact
and in preparation for trial. Respondent argues that in the
absence of the original document, the date on which the document
was prepared cannot be accurately ascertained. The requirement
of authentication is a condition precedent to the admissibility
of the lease agreement. Fed. R. Evid. 901. Evidence that will
support a finding that the matter in question is what its
proponent claims is sufficient. McMahon v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1991-355.
2Although petitioner Bui testified that she rented the
sewing machines from Mr. Tran Trung, the lease agreement
identifies the lessor as Mr. Chung V. Tran. This inconsistency
remains unexplained.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011