- 6 -
matter of legislative grace, and petitioner bears the burden of
proving his entitlement to any deduction claimed. Rule 142(a);
INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); New
Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934).
Petitioner's burden includes the requirement that he substantiate
any deductions claimed. Hradesky v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 87
(1975), affd. per curiam 540 F.2d 821 (5th Cir. 1976).
Section 274(d)(4) provides that no deduction shall be
allowed with respect to any listed property, defined in section
280F(d)(4)(A) to include passenger automobiles, unless the
taxpayer meets strict substantiation rules. However, section
280F(d)(5)(B) provides that the term "passenger automobile" does
not include any vehicle used by the taxpayer directly in the
trade or business of transporting persons or property for
compensation or hire. Since petitioner's claimed deductions are
for his use of passenger automobiles as taxicabs, section
274(d)(4) is not applicable in this case.
Notwithstanding the nonapplicability of section 274(d)(4),
petitioner failed to present any records that show that he is
entitled to business expense deductions with respect to his
taxicabs in excess of the amounts allowed by respondent. The
only receipts provided by petitioner are for repairs made to his
taxicab during 1993. Such receipts are partially illegible and
do not exceed the amount allowed by respondent. Petitioner has
failed to meet his burden of proof on this issue. Rule 142(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011