- 10 -
repairs, no substantiating evidence was presented. We sustain
respondent’s disallowance of this item.
g. Supplies. Petitioners purchased supplies such as window
washing solution and a compound used for removing materials stuck
to glass. Canceled checks submitted verify the purchase of
supplies on July 7, 1990, for $42.50. On this record and using
our best judgment, we allow petitioners a deduction for supplies
of $600. Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540 (2d Cir. 1930).
h. Taxes and licenses. Petitioner testified that he had to
purchase a municipal business license whenever JDB had to go into
a new municipality. Each license was valid for one year. We
kept the record open for petitioners to contact the various
municipalities to obtain substantiating documentation. Nothing
was received. On this record, we have no basis upon which to
estimate or allow a deduction for expenses for licenses. Vanicek
v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 731 (1985).
i. Labor. We find that petitioners hired outside labor to
perform the services required. We also find that petitioners
performed some of the services themselves. Canceled checks for
such labor for the period June 26, 1990, through July 7, 1990,
totaled $2,890. Based upon this record, we allow petitioners a
deduction for labor of $10,000. Cohan v. Commissioner, supra.
The final issue to be decided is whether petitioners are
liable for an addition to tax pursuant to section 6651(a)(1).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011