Shizuo George Kurata - Page 12

                                               - 12 -                                                 
            that the five units were destroyed in whole or in part.  We are                           
            not persuaded by petitioner's unsupported assertions, and we find                         
            that the five units were not destroyed in whole or in part.                               
                  Our finding that the five units were not destroyed in whole                         
            or in part precludes nonrecognition treatment under section                               
            1033(a).  We also note, however, that petitioner has failed to                            
            submit any evidence, other than his uncorroborated assertions at                          
            trial, that he was compelled to enter into the group settlement                           
            agreement with Great Bank or that petitioner acquired property                            
            similar or related in service or use to the five units.                                   
            Petitioner's attempt to introduce evidence in his brief, filed                            
            July 1, 1996, to support his claim under section 1033(a) is                               
            rejected.  See Rule 143(b).  Thus, respondent's adjustment                                
            increasing petitioner's gross income for the gain realized on the                         
            sale of the five units is sustained to the extent of $103,264,                            
            and, accordingly, respondent's adjustment increasing petitioner's                         
            taxable income is sustained to the extent of $91,352.                                     
                  B.  Employee Business Expenses                                                      
                  Petitioner claimed on the 1989 tax return a miscellaneous                           
            deduction in the amount of $20,388 for unreimbursed employee                              
            business expenses.  In the notice of deficiency, respondent                               
            disallowed $19,978 of that deduction and increased petitioner's                           
            taxable income accordingly.  Respondent explained that petitioner                         
            was not entitled to the disallowed deduction because he failed to                         

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011