- 9 -
visited while away from home (the time requirement), (2) the
cities or points of locality of travel (the place requirement),
and (3) the business nexus between his employment and his travel
(the business purpose requirement). See Johnson v. Commissioner,
supra.
Here, petitioner has introduced into evidence the log of the
tugboat for 1996 and a schedule that lists each of the locations
to which he traveled on business and the dates of that travel.
Although the log and schedule are somewhat inconsistent with each
other, as well as with respect to information that petitioner
reported on his 1996 tax return in support of his deduction,
respondent, for some unexplained reason, has conceded that
petitioner traveled to each of the cities stated on that schedule
and did so on the corresponding dates shown on the schedule. We
believe that the business purpose nexus between petitioner’s
incidental expenses and his travel is met by virtue of those
documents when viewed in the context of the record at hand and
conclude that petitioner has met the time, place, and business
purpose requirements of section 1.274-5T(b)(2), Temporary Income
Tax Regs., supra, as to the incidental expenses which he incurred
during 1996. Under the precedent of Johnson, we hold that
petitioner is entitled to deduct the incidental expense portion
of the applicable M&IE rates for his points of travel as set
forth on his schedule.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011