- 45 -
partnership maintained its own checking account. The questioned
checks are for the amounts of $5,200, $7,000, and $2,000 for
1988, 1990, and 1991, respectively. The Takaos reported passive
losses of $2,696 and $2,310 from Toraya Apartments for 1988 and
1991, respectively, and passive income of $2,768 from Toraya
Apartments for 1990. Neither Nakamura nor Yoshinori testified as
to the nature of the disputed checks. We are not persuaded that
the disputed checks from Toraya constitute rental income already
included in income.
Petitioners speculate that the deposit in the amount of
$1,000 from Toraya for 1988 was salary already reported in
income. Yoshinori reported Form W-2 wages from Toraya for 1988
of $2,400, and Akiko reported Form W-2 wages from Toraya for 1988
of $5,275. Yoshinori did not testify regarding the nature of the
$1,000 check from Toraya or about the manner in which Toraya paid
his or Akiko's salary. Statements in briefs are not evidence.
Rule 143(b); Niedringhaus v. Commissioner, supra; Viehweg v.
Commissioner, supra; Evans v. Commissioner, supra. Under the
circumstances, we are not persuaded that the $1,000 was included
in income for 1988 as wages.
Petitioners contend that the $32,000 check from Nakamura
deposited in 1990 was a loan and not income. Nakamura testified
that he lent Yoshinori money in 1990. The record also contains a
promissory note dated August 17, 1990, in which Yoshinori
promises to pay Nakamura $32,000. On the basis of that evidence,
Page: Previous 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011