- 4 - 7491(a). Accordingly, we conclude that pursuant to section 7491(a) the burden of proof does not shift to respondent. II. Remaining Schedule C Expenses Deductions are a matter of legislative grace, and petitioners have the burden of showing that they are entitled to any deduction claimed. See Rule 142(a); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934). Petitioners presented no evidence regarding the minimart’s expenses for 1995, 1996, 1997, or 1998 that were not stipulated or conceded by respondent. Accordingly, we sustain respondent’s determination regarding these amounts. III. Gross Receipts Petitioners argue that the amounts of gross receipts listed on their 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998 returns overstated their actual gross receipts because the amounts listed erroneously included loans2 made to John Biazar (petitioner) that he deposited into the minimart’s bank accounts. Petitioner testified that he received the alleged loans as checks and repaid the alleged loans via check. Other witnesses testified that they provided petitioner cash, and he provided them cash, not checks. 2 We use the term “loan” for convenience only. We make no finding that the amounts third parties provided petitioner were in fact loans. We note that one witness testified that no interest was charged on the alleged loans, and no loan agreements were ever executed.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011