- 14 - take into account any nontaxable source or deductible expense of which the Commissioner has knowledge. Id. at 645-646. We agree that petitioner’s records were inadequate to substantiate all of her income and deductions. We note that the records petitioner produced to the Court are voluminous but disorganized. Petitioner commingled the records of expenses claimed on her return with the records of expenses claimed on the return of Sams, Inc. While we conclude generally that respondent’s use of the bank deposit methodology was reasonable, we now consider whether each separate deposit into the account was gross income to petitioner because it appears that respondent has not taken into consideration whether each item is from a nontaxable source or a deductible expense. Deposits made into the account in 1996 total $99,381. Of the deposits, returned checks account for $3,375 of this amount. The returned checks are not includable in petitioner’s gross income. Deposits of $14,700, as reflected in deposit slips, are withdrawals from petitioner’s home equity line of credit. These withdrawals are loans and, therefore, are not includable in petitioner’s gross income. Petitioner provided credible evidence that the deposit of $3,881 is a reimbursement of engineering expenses. Therefore, the reimbursement is not includable in petitioner’s gross income.Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011