Ajuba Gaylord - Page 11

                                       - 11 -                                         
          comply with the substantiation requirements of section 274(d).              
          Accordingly, we sustain respondent’s determination with respect             
          to these deductions.                                                        
               4.   Cellular Phone Expenses                                           
               Petitioner disputes respondent’s denial of $1,842 in                   
          cellular phone expenses she incurred in 1999.                               
               Cellular phones are included in the definition of “listed              
          property” for purposes of section 274(d)(4) and are thus subject            
          to the strict substantiation requirements of this section.                  
               In support of her claim for deductions, petitioner presented           
          copies of 10 checks, drawn on her account for a total of $1,842.            
          Six of the checks were made payable to “Bell Atlantic Mobile” and           
          “C-work Solutions”, while the remaining four were made payable to           
          a specific individual.  Petitioner testified that the recipient             
          of the latter payments was her sister, whose phone she was using            
          during that time.  Even if we were to believe petitioner’s                  
          assertions, which we do not, petitioner has produced no evidence            
          that the phone was used for business purposes or any other                  
          reliable evidence regarding the services rendered.  Given                   
          petitioner’s failure to substantiate the cellular phone expenses,           
          we sustain respondent’s determination denying these deductions.             
               5. Utilities                                                           
               Petitioner claimed deductions for utilities used in her home           
          office for both 1999 and 2000.  After concessions by petitioner             
          at trial, the amount that remains in contention is $497 incurred            
          during 1999.                                                                





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011