- 7 -
the other assets, however, was not substantially justified
because respondent did not request substantiation for these
assets.
B. Pruning Costs
In December 1997, petitioners amended their petitions to
contend that Salopek incorrectly capitalized pecan tree pruning
costs it should have expensed. Respondent disagreed because he
had no information that substantiated petitioners' contentions.
When the appropriate substantiation was submitted, respondent
conceded the issue. Therefore, respondent's position was
substantially justified.
C. Cattle Contribution
Respondent contends that he was substantially justified in
disallowing Salopek's FY 1993 cattle contribution deduction
because petitioners failed to provide the necessary
substantiation. The Commissioner may deny a taxpayer a deduction
for the charitable contribution of property if the taxpayer fails
to maintain certain documentation (e.g., the value of the
property and the date of the contribution). See sec. 1.170A-
13(b), Income Tax Regs. During the examination, Agent Parker
requested that petitioners substantiate the cattle contribution
deduction. Upon receiving the substantiation, respondent
proposed to settle this issue. Therefore, respondent's position
was substantially justified.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011