- 140 -
1992 was $48,000.[3] However, at trial Mr. Sutton
testified that the property was not sold until 1995.
If petitioner sold his interest in the property in 1992
for $48,000, then with an adjusted basis of $27,000,
petitioner would have a gain of $21,000. * * *
However, petitioner did not receive any cash or
proceeds on any sale. * * * Petitioner only reported a
gain as a result of being relieved from the assumption
of the debt by the buyer.
1Contrary to petitioner’s claim on brief, Mr. Dubrovsky did
not testify that he distributed $30,000 to petitioner on June 3,
1988, as a return of petitioner’s investment in the Camino prop-
erty. Mr. Dubrovsky testified that he distributed $63,000 to
petitioner on June 3, 1988, as a return of petitioner’s investment
in that property. The record contains a copy of a check dated
June 3, 1988, from Mr. Dubrovsky to petitioner in the amount of
$63,000, which petitioner negotiated. Although we are not re-
quired to, and we shall not, rely on Mr. Dubrovsky’s testimony to
establish the purpose of that check, the parties do not dispute
that the $63,000 check from Mr. Dubrovsky to petitioner repre-
sented a distribution with respect to the Camino property. Even
if we were to rely on Mr. Dubrovsky’s testimony and/or accept the
parties’ agreement as to the purpose of that check, neither that
testimony nor that agreement establishes petitioner’s basis in the
Sanchez Street property.
3Contrary to petitioner’s claim on brief, petitioner and Ms.
Brodsky reported the sale of the Sanchez Street property in the
1993 joint return, Mr. Sutton did not prepare that return or
calculate the gain on the sale of that property that they reported
in that return, and $48,000 was the gross sales price, not the
gain, that they reported from that sale in that return.
Although not altogether clear, it appears from the foregoing
excerpt that petitioner takes the position on brief (1) that he
held a 10-percent ownership interest in the Sanchez Street
property since the date of the purchase of that property,
(2) that his basis at all times in that ownership interest was
$27,000, and (3) that that property (a) was sold in 1993 for
$48,000 as reported in the 1993 joint return or (b) in the
alternative was sold in 1995 for an undisclosed amount. In
support of petitioner’s position regarding his ownership interest
Page: Previous 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011