- 18 - activity, respondent conceded that petitioner was entitled to additional business deductions of $45,184, for a total allowance of $157,207. With respect to the $1,490 claimed loss, petitioner contended that he provided his accountant with information that a taxi had been set on fire during an unlawful use, but that he is unsure how the accountant used that information. Concerning petitioner’s $97,580 ($254,787 claimed less $157,207 allowed) of unallowed business deductions for 1991, petitioner was not able to show supporting documentation or provide other evidence that would show that he was entitled to more deductions than allowed by respondent. Petitioner did contend that his business information or records were unavailable due to the criminal prosecution and respondent’s examination. Petitioner has not shown that he was denied access to the information and records used by the State in his prosecution. The State of Maryland investigator testified that petitioner’s records that were seized by the State were available to petitioner at all times.4 In addition, the record in this case reflects that respondent’s examination was extensive and that respondent was reasonable in the allowance of deductions 4 The investigator also testified that petitioner lied to him during the investigation for Medicaid fraud. In addition, the investigator stated that petitioner had concealed records from the State grand jury.Page: 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