- 16 -
Commissioner, 854 F.2d 263 (7th Cir. 1988) (concession some 6
months after the answer was filed, after the Government had an
opportunity to verify information, held reasonable), affg. T.C.
Memo. 1987-52; Sliwa v. Commissioner, 839 F.2d 602, 609 (9th Cir.
1988) (reasonable for concession not to have been made until the
IRS had opportunity to review records obtained some 6 months
prior), affg. an unreported opinion of this Court; Ashburn v.
United States, 740 F.2d 843 (11th Cir. 1984) (11-month delay in
conceding case not unreasonable); White v. United States, 740
F.2d 836, 842 (11th Cir. 1984) (Government's concession of issue
3 months after issue raised was reasonable).
Petitioners suggest that respondent was aware of the
restitution ordered by the State court after Phillip pleaded
guilty to grand theft, and assert, therefore, that respondent
knew that Phillip had made the repayments. Petitioners'
contention is wanting in logic. The State court issued the order
in 1995. Any repayments made as a result of the order were
necessarily made after the years at issue in this case and,
therefore, would not be deductible in the years at issue. Based
on the facts available to respondent, we find it reasonable for
respondent not to offset the embezzlement income with the alleged
payments until the repayments were substantiated.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011