- 4 - an investigation of his return preparer, Space Coast. Petitioner also complains that the IRS failed to respond to his inquiries. The determinations of the Commissioner in a notice of deficiency are presumed correct, and the burden of proof is on the taxpayer to show that the determinations are incorrect. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and petitioner bears the burden of proving entitlement to any claimed deductions. New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435 (1934). Section 162(a) permits a deduction for "ordinary and necessary" expenses incurred while carrying on a trade or business. Since petitioner is an employee, any deductions to which he might be entitled would be included as employee expense deductions on Schedule A. Primuth v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 374, 377 (1970). Petitioner has failed in his burden of proof. Petitioner did not present any documents or testimony in this case upon which we can make a finding that there was a business purpose to the claimed employee expenses. In fact, petitioner testified that some of the expenses related to visiting family members. Thus, there is no question but that some of the claimed expenses are personal in nature and nondeductible. Sec. 262. With respect to petitioner's complaints that he was unfairly selected for examination, we note that the Commissioner, in an attempt to ascertain the correctness of a taxpayer's return, mayPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011