- 43 -
information was the subject of stipulations entered into after
the 15-day period specified in our pretrial order had expired.
Finally, we note that even if we admit the checks offered by
petitioner as proof that Universal paid the payees named therein,
petitioner is still required to prove that the payments were
ordinary and necessary business expenses. See Interstate Transit
Lines v. Commissioner, 319 U.S. 590, 593 (1943) (taxpayer must
prove entitlement to any deduction claimed). For all these
reasons we conclude that respondent would not be prejudiced by
our admission of the checks submitted by petitioner and that in
fairness we should admit them into evidence.
B. Did Petitioner Prove His Entitlement to Deductions?
Petitioner asserts that the checks prove his entitlement to
deductions for the following categories of expenses: Water;
electricity; gas; home office cleaning and maintenance; medical
insurance; life insurance; equipment; subscriptions and
publications; cellular phone service; supplies; automobile; trash
pickup; and miscellaneous. However, the information contained on
many of the checks does not prove that the checks were actually
used to pay expenses of the category claimed. More importantly,
the checks appear to have been used to pay expenses that could be
either business or personal, depending on the circumstances. In
the absence of any evidence of the business purpose of these
Page: Previous 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011