- 4 - petitioner was not entitled to the Schedule C car and truck expense deduction because petitioner failed to substantiate the actual expenses claimed, and, instead, petitioner was allowed a deduction based on standard mileage. Therefore, respondent disallowed the depreciation deduction for petitioner’s Lexus and further disallowed a portion of the depreciation deduction claimed for his computers for failure to substantiate the amounts claimed. In the petition, petitioner raised a new issue that the amount of gross receipts reported on his Schedule C was overstated. Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving the entitlement to any deduction claimed. INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934).4 Section 162(a) allows a taxpayer to deduct all ordinary and necessary business expenses paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on any trade or business. To be “necessary” an expense must be “appropriate and helpful” to the taxpayer’s business. Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 113 (1933). To be 4 Upon reviewing the record, it is unclear when the audit of petitioner’s 1996 return commenced. However, since sec. 7491(a) does not alter the taxpayer’s burden of proof where the taxpayer has not complied with all applicable substantiation requirements, including those of sec. 274(d), sec. 7491(a) does not apply in this case. Higbee v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 438, 442 (2001).Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011