Antonio and Luzviminda Pungot - Page 2




                                        - 2 -                                         
               This is a fully stipulated case that was submitted without a           
          trial under Rule 122.  We incorporate in this opinion the                   
          parties’ stipulation of facts and the exhibits.  Petitioners, who           
          resided in West New York, New Jersey, when they petitioned the              
          Court, filed joint Federal income tax returns for 1994 and 1995.            
          All references to petitioner are to Antonio Pungot.                         
          Background                                                                  
               During the years in issue, petitioner worked full time as a            
          mechanical engineer for E.A. Sears Burrwood PLLC and LKU Group              
          Inc., engineering consulting firms specializing in real estate              
          development.  He also spent time; i.e., 990 hours in 1994 and               
          1,552 hours in 1995, performing on–site maintenance at two                  
          residential rental properties that he and his wife owned.                   
          Petitioners, whose modified adjusted gross income exceeded                  
          $100,000, see sec. 469(i)(3)(E), deducted $27,958 and $38,759 for           
          losses relating to the rental activity on their 1994 and 1995               
          Federal income tax returns, respectively.  In the statutory                 
          notice, respondent overstated the amount of losses petitioners              
          reported on Schedules E, Supplemental Income and Loss; respon-              
          dent, who concedes that the notice is incorrect, now disallows              
          $15,866 and $38,381 of petitioners’ claimed losses.  Petitioners            
          concede that, absent a ruling in their favor on the constitu-               
          tional issue, respondent’s recomputed deficiencies of $4,125 for            
          1994 and $10,583 for 1995 are correct.                                      






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011