- 17 -
Petitioner is allowed a deduction for the ordinary and
necessary expenses paid or incurred in carrying on his trade or
business. Sec. 162. It is clear that a business expense
incurred only once cannot be claimed twice. Deductions are a
matter of legislative grace, New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering,
292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934), and petitioner has the burden of
proving that he is entitled to any deductions claimed. Rule
142(a); Welch v. Helvering , 290 U.S. 111 (1933).
Petitioner acknowledged at trial that some of the expenses
he claimed were duplicated. He indicated that when he hastily
prepared the Federal income tax return on or about April 15,
1991, he may have forgotten that he had transferred the MYM
expense items into the DAC system in December 1990.
The evidence shows that petitioner deducted various expenses
included in the MYM system twice, once as deductions based on the
MYM system and a second time when the same expenses were
transferred to the DAC system and included as deductions claimed
based on the DAC system. The duplicated expenses included on
petitioner's Schedule C for 1990 are as follows:
Expense Amount Duplicated
Advertising $637.47
Car and truck 1,076.64
Insurance 1,327.26
Legal and prof. 3,440.00
Moving 1,254.00
Office expense 2,778.84
Other expense 2,540.96
Rent 1,575.00
Supplies 8,969.29
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011