- 5 -
At trial, petitioner presented no documentary evidence to
support his claim for deductions in excess of the amounts allowed
by respondent. Petitioner argued he had records to substantiate
amounts that would exceed those allowed by respondent; however,
his records were "scattered" in several places, and, with
sufficient time, he could produce such records that would
establish his entitlement to additional deductions. The Court
notes that trial of this case was continued once because of
petitioner's incarceration; however, he had been released from
incarceration approximately 3 months prior to trial of this case.
The Court is not convinced that petitioner did not have
sufficient time to prepare his case. Moreover, as noted earlier,
petitioner's wife presented their business records to respondent
in the audit process, and, based on the documentation she
presented, respondent allowed the expenses shown above. There
are circumstances, however, where the Court is allowed to
estimate the amount of an allowable deduction under what has been
referred to as the Cohan rule. Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d
540 (2d Cir. 1930). To apply that rule, the Court must find that
the taxpayer is entitled to a deduction but is unable to
establish the amount of the deduction. On this record,
petitioner failed to present any evidence that would satisfy the
Court that the expenses he incurred were in excess of the amounts
allowed by respondent. Moreover, travel, meals, and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011