- 35 - C.P.A. signed Lakeview's 1992 Form 1120S that labels the $75,000 as rent. A third characterization of the payment was made on a Form 1099 issued by Lakeview to William labeling it as "Nonemployee compensation". With respect to the claimed deductions for the legal fees, gate, roof, and computer expenses, petitioner has failed to meet the burden of showing that Lakeview provided its accountant with complete and accurate information. The only evidence pertaining to the issue is Lakeview's C.P.A.'s signature on the corporation's 1992 return, which we conclude is insufficient support for the inference that Lakeview supplied its C.P.A. with complete and accurate information. Petitioner argues on brief that "at no time did respondent even attempt to claim that [Lakeview's accountant] * * * had not been given all the facts by petitioner." However, the burden is on petitioner to affirmatively show that Lakeview's accountant received the requisite information. Rule 142(a); see Selig v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-519. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered under Rule 155.Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Last modified: May 25, 2011