Timothy E. Butler - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
               Petitioner received a refund of State income tax in the                
          amount of $414 in 1994.  Petitioner did not report the receipt of           
          this refund on his 1994 income tax return.                                  
               Petitioner relied upon a commercial service to prepare his             
          income tax returns for 1993 and 1994.                                       
               In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined, inter              
          alia: (1) Petitioner is not entitled to any dependency exemptions           
          for 1993 and 1994; (2) petitioner is entitled to "single" filing            
          status, rather than head-of-household filing status, in 1993 and            
          1994; (3) petitioner failed to substantiate the payment of any              
          (a) charitable contributions in 1993 and 1994 and (b) union dues            
          in 1993; (4) petitioner is not entitled to deduct any gambling              
          losses in 1993; (5) petitioner failed to substantiate the payment           
          of any claimed rental expenses in 1994 for cleaning and                     
          maintenance, repairs, and utilities; (6) petitioner duplicated              
          deductions in 1994 for mortgage interest and real estate taxes on           
          his Schedules A and E; (7) petitioner failed to report the refund           
          of State income taxes in 1993 and 1994; and (8) petitioner is               
          liable for the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a) for           
          negligence or intentional disregard of rules or regulations.                

                                       OPINION                                        
               Generally, the Commissioner's determinations are presumed              
          correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that those            
          determinations are erroneous.  Rule 142(a); INDOPCO, Inc. v.                





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