John Gallo - Page 5

                                        - 5 -                                         

          providers generally gave a positive prognosis for his full                  
          recovery. On the Schedule C attached to petitioner’s 1992 return,           
          petitioner reported no income from his paralegal/boat repair                
          business2 and claimed the following expenses:                               
                    Depreciation             $1,222                                   
                    Office expense           465                                      
                    Pension and profit                                                
                   sharing plans         35                                          
                    Rent                     3,600                                    
                    Repairs and                                                       
                    maintenance              25                                       
                    Storage                  1,980                                    
                    Trade books              916                                      
                    Paralegal association      50                                     
                        Total               8,293                                    
               As indicated earlier, the storage costs of $1,980 pertain to           
          his boat activity.  The $35 for pension and profit sharing plans            
          was a maintenance fee for his Keogh plan.  All of the other                 
          expenses are directly related to petitioner’s paralegal activity.           
          Petitioner has adequately substantiated the above amounts, and              
          substantiation is not an issue in this case.                                
               Because a possible remedy would be to dismiss this case in             
          favor of petitioner if we were to grant petitioner’s motion, we             
          will deal with the motion first.  In his motion, petitioner                 
          contends that respondent’s actions with regard to petitioner’s              
          discovery request and at the “Branerton conference”3 violated               

          2  Petitioner’s reported income was from withdrawals from an                
          individual retirement account.                                              
          3  Branerton Corp. v Commissioner, 61 T.C. 691 (1974), is                   

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011