- 2 - After concessions,1 the issues for decision are: (1) Whether the corporate form of Export USA, Inc., should be disregarded; and (2) whether petitioner2 is entitled to deductions on Schedule C, Profit or Loss From Business, in excess of the amounts allowed by respondent. FINDINGS OF FACT Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The stipulated facts and the related exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. At the time of filing the petition, petitioner resided in Rockville, Maryland. 1 Petitioner reported gross receipts of $700 and claimed cost of goods sold of $580 on Schedule C for 1996. At trial, petitioner conceded that both items should have been reported as zero. For 1996, respondent disallowed deductions of $37 for supplies and $170 for repairs and maintenance. Petitioner did not present evidence as to these expenses. As a result, petitioner is deemed to have conceded these issues. See Rules 142(a), 149(b); Burris v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-49. 2 Respondent also determined deficiencies for Vandana Srivastava, petitioner’s former wife. Ms. Srivastava was initially captioned as a party in this case. At trial, petitioner stated that he signed the petition for Ms. Srivastava without consulting with her. Petitioner has not had contact with his former wife since 1998, and the petition in this case was filed on Mar. 8, 2000. Respondent moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as to Ms. Srivastava. There being no indication that Ms. Srivastava intended to file a timely petition, we granted respondent’s motion. See Rule 13(a), (c); Abeles v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 103, 106-109 (1988).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011