- 23 -
contested payment although they produced a bank statement for the
same general time period reflecting other payments at issue.6
Once again we cite the general rule that cash method
taxpayers may deduct expenses in the year actual payment takes
place. See sec. 1.461-1(a)(1), Income Tax Regs. Generally,
delivery of a check will constitute payment. See Estate of
Spiegel v. Commissioner, 12 T.C. 524, 533 (1949). If a check is
dated in one year but cashed in the next year, the deduction will
not be allowed absent proof of delivery in the year of the
deduction. See Odom v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1982-531, affd.
707 F.2d 508 (4th Cir. 1983); McCoy v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1971-34. Petitioners have not offered any evidence that check No.
3084 for $872 was delivered to the payee in 1994 and the amount is
therefore not deductible for that year.
On Schedule C for 1994 petitioners also seek to deduct legal
expenses incurred for Mrs. Reynolds’ representation in a sex
discrimination action. They produced a copy of a September 1994
6 Petitioners had more than one checking account. Checks
written on account No. 302386-8 bore three-digit numbers in the
two hundreds at the end of 1993. Petitioners introduced as
evidence for other items, checks written on account Nos. 039-0950
and 016020109603. Checks written on the latter accounts in 1993
bore four digits in the high two thousands and low three
thousands and three-digit numbers, respectively. Check No. 3084
is either out of order by months or was written on a fourth
account. Petitioners offered no explanation for their inability
to produce canceled check No. 3084, a copy of it, or a statement
showing it.
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011