- 25 - incurred the expense. Petitioner, therefore, has failed to establish that the $325 was a deductible expense incurred by Special O.12 The third issue is the proper amount of gross income attributable to Special Occasions and Special O for 1992 and 1993. Because Special Occasions and Special O did not maintain adequate books and records, respondent used the bank deposits method to reconstruct the income of both entities. The use of the bank deposits method to reconstruct income is well established and has been sanctioned by the courts. See DiLeo v. Commissioner, 96 T.C. 858, 868 (1991), affd. 959 F.2d 16 (2d Cir. 1992); Nicholas v. Commissioner, 70 T.C. 1057, 1064 (1978). The Commissioner is required to take into account any nontaxable sources of deposits or deductible expenses of which the Commissioner is aware. See DiLeo v. Commissioner, supra at 868. The testimony of a taxpayer unsupported by documentary evidence may be insufficient to cast doubt upon the 12 In Wilson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-141, involving the 1992 tax year of Marian Wilson, who was the shareholder in Special O who paid the $325 in question, it was stipulated that the travel expenses claimed by Special O had been paid from the personal funds of the shareholders of Special O. In the subject case, the Court held that Marian Wilson had not established that such travel expenses had been reimbursed to her, and, therefore, travel expenses paid for in the manner stipulated were not deductible by Special O.Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011