- 178 -
Diesel Power appears to have had little or no involvement in the
Pakistani sale and, therefore, did not earn the commissions in
relation to it. Petitioner, on the other hand, earned all of the
GM commissions attributed to Diesel Power on the CTC receipts
journal. Petitioner appears to have negotiated the Pakistani
locomotive sale and he was in control of the arrangement. A
letter from petitioner to Mr. Khilnani indicates that petitioner
was willing to pay for Mr. Khilnani's travel expenses, which he
apparently was not required to do. Diesel Power does not appear
to have had any involvement in these arrangements. There is also
testimony that Diesel Power never sold anything that was not
shipped to Iran. There is persuasive evidence that petitioner
was responsible for and controlled the Pakistani arrangement.
Therefore, we conclude that petitioner earned the commissions
paid in connection therewith.
For the same reason, we conclude that respondent's
allocation in the notice of deficiency for 1976 of "other" income
in the amount of $34,377.70, which is equivalent to payments to
Mr. Khilnani, also was correct. However, the payments made to
Mr. Khilnani and the Amelia Corporation, to the extent proven,
would also constitute deductible commission expenses. All
payments to Amelia Corporation but one were sufficiently proven
and constitute deductible expenses. With respect to this one
payment, petitioner stated that $50,000 was paid in 1976 to
Page: Previous 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011