- 2 - claims that R’s revised deficiency determinations constitute the raising of “new matters” with respect to which R bears the burden of proof. 1. Held: R has not raised new matters, and, therefore, the burden of proof remains with P. 2. Held, further, R’s disallowance of a portion of P’s deductions for shareholder compensation is sustained in part. 3. Held, further, the penalties are sustained. Robyn A. Frohlin, for petitioner. James R. Turton, for respondent. MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION HALPERN, Judge: By notice of deficiency dated June 25, 1998 (the notice), respondent determined deficiencies in petitioner’s Federal income tax and accuracy-related penalties as follows: Tax Year Ending Sec. 6662(a) December 31 Deficiency Penalty 1994 $206,455 $41,291 1995 287,606 57,521 The principal adjustments giving rise to those deficiencies (the principal adjustments) are respondent’s disallowance for each year of a portion of the deduction claimed by petitioner for compensation paid for services. The amounts disallowed (disallowed amounts) are $598,710 and $805,469, for 1994 andPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011