- 8 - expense deduction. At trial, respondent took the position that the $980 had been erroneously allowed; however, respondent did not move to disallow that amount or to increase the deficiency in taxes attributable to the $980. The record is not clear as to the basis upon which the $980 was allowed, nor as to the basis for respondent’s claim at trial that the allowed $980 was in error. For the year 1998, petitioners again determined that 20 percent of their Deepak residence constituted the home office for the writing activity of Mr. Radnitz. However, since petitioners agree that their residence was used only for 6 months, on their 1998 return, they only deducted expenses for one-half of that year for Mr. Radnitz’s writing activity. For this 6-month period, petitioners deducted $3,740 as a home office expense on their 1998 return. In the notice of deficiency, respondent allowed $1,503. As with regard to the 1997 year, respondent claimed at trial that the amount allowed for 1998 was erroneous but did not move at trial to disallow that amount or to increase the deficiency. Also for 1998, petitioners deducted expenses for the two rented apartments (the North Indian Avenue and the Ravenspur apartments), which were used by Mrs. Radnitz and Mr. Radnitz. The North Indian Avenue apartment was used by Mr. Radnitz for 3 months during 1998 and the total expenses incurred for that timePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011