Thomas N. Coccia - Page 9

                                        - 8 -                                         
          1965-247, affd. per curiam 359 F.2d 64 (1st Cir. 1966).                     
          Otherwise, there would be no way of knowing whether the sum of              
          the losses deducted on the return is greater or less than the               
          taxpayer's winnings.  Schooler v. Commissioner, supra at 869.               
               Petitioner did not maintain a diary or any other                       
          contemporaneous record reflecting either his winnings or his                
          losses from gambling during the 2000 taxable year.  The only                
          evidence presented at trial was petitioner's testimony, on which            
          we decline to rely.                                                         
               Although the Court acknowledges that petitioner most likely            
          had some gambling losses during the year, we are unable to                  
          determine (either with specificity or by estimation) the amount             
          of those losses on the basis of the record at hand.  Petitioner             
          has not met his burden of proof on this issue.  See Mayer v.                
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-295, affd. 29 Fed. Appx. 706 (2d              
          Cir. 2002); Zielonka v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-81; see               
          also Finesod v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-66.                           
          C.   Petitioner's Business Losses                                           
               The Schedule C attached to petitioner's "amended return"               
          reported trade or business expenses that resulted in a loss of              
          $11,900 for his newsstand business.  Petitioner claimed                     
          entitlement to this business loss for the first time shortly                
          before trial and argued the issue at trial.  Respondent                     
          questioned petitioner regarding substantiation of the expenses.             

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011