Paul L. Tregre, Jr. - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
               Petitioner concedes that he is unable to substantiate the              
          expenses at issue.  He contends that all evidence pertaining to             
          such expenses was provided to his accountants, who in turn                  
          relinquished possession of such evidence to the Government during           
          the grand jury phase of the criminal investigation against him.             
          Respondent, however, has informed the Court that she requested              
          and received all evidence used by the grand jury and that no such           
          records were among the materials she received.                              
               We find that having failed to provide substantiation of the            
          Schedule C expenses, petitioner has not carried his burden of               
          proof on this issue.  Accordingly, respondent's determination is            
          sustained.                                                                  
          Investment Tax Credit                                                       
               Respondent also determined that petitioner is not entitled             
          to an investment tax credit in the amount of $821 for 1982                  
          because it has not been established that petitioner acquired any            
          qualified investment property during the taxable year.  As noted            
          above, respondent's determinations are benefited by a presumption           
          of correctness and petitioner bears the burden of proving the               
          contrary.  Rule 142(a); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, supra            
          at 440; Welch v. Helvering, supra at 115.                                   
               Petitioner has not offered any evidence with respect to the            
          investment tax credit claimed on the purchase of his Corvette               
          automobile.  Again, petitioner restricts his entire argument to             
          the contention that the statute of limitations precludes                    




Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011