Nicholas A. and Marjorie E. Paleveda - Page 11

                                       - 11 -                                         
          offset is phased out once the Rule 155 computations that we order           
          below are made.  Rule 142(a).                                               
               As stated in our findings of fact, after concessions and the           
          application of statutory limitations, the amount of disallowed              
          deductions in issue is $4,934.  Respondent argues that                      
          petitioners have not substantiated their deduction for real                 
          estate taxes to the extent of $1,384 and their deduction for                
          charitable contributions to the extent of $3,548 ($2 mathematical           
          error).  Petitioners argue that their deductions are established            
          by the canceled checks presented by petitioner at the audit                 
          level.  Additionally, petitioners argue that, as respondent                 
          disallowed many of the checks at the audit level on the grounds             
          that petitioners could have received a personal benefit, it is              
          impossible for petitioners to prove that they did not receive               
          such a benefit.                                                             
               In the instant case, petitioners provided no books, records,           
          or checks substantiating the disallowed deductions.  As to the              
          checks petitioner claims to have presented at the audit level, we           
          decide petitioners' liability for income tax deficiencies on the            
          evidence produced at trial and not a previous record developed at           
          the administrative level.  Greenberg's Express, Inc. v.                     
          Commissioner, 62 T.C. 324 (1974).  On the basis of the record in            
          the instant case, we conclude that petitioners have not carried             
          their burden of substantiating the amount and purpose of the                
          disallowed deductions.  Accordingly, we sustain respondent's                




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