MTS International, Inc. - Page 18

                                               - 18 -                                                  

            petitioner for petitioner corporation, and various hotel,                                  
            restaurant, and transportation receipts which lacked complete                              
            dates (i.e., the year was missing), or failed to adequately show                           
            the business purpose or to show that the statement of business                             
            purpose was made contemporaneously.  Even if we had admitted                               
            petitioner’s exhibits, they would not have substantiated                                   
            petitioner’s claim that he made payments to or on behalf of                                
            petitioner corporation.                                                                    
                  Petitioner offered no evidence that the debts were not                               
            canceled, that he did not make withdrawals from petitioner                                 
            corporation, that the amounts were repaid, or that the                                     
            withdrawals and debt cancellations were not taxable dividends to                           
            him.  Sec. 6001; Rule 142(a).  Petitioner’s records were totally                           
            inadequate to convince us that he made unreimbursed payments of                            
            mortgage and other expenses of petitioner corporation.  However,                           
            petitioner’s testimony convinces us that he made some cash                                 
            advances to petitioner corporation.  We find that $30,000 of the                           
            $194,224 in dispute was not dividends from petitioner corporation                          
            to petitioner.                                                                             
                  Petitioner corporation had retained earnings in 1987 of                              
            $324,670, which is enough to establish that the cash advances to                           
            petitioner were dividends.  Sec. 316(a).  Petitioner has not                               
            shown that petitioner corporation did not have enough retained                             
            earnings to support respondent’s determination that he received                            





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011