- 22 - facility by the corporation as the owner. Moreover, from a legal standpoint, even if respondent had passed upon the application of sections 162(a) and 274(a)(1)(B) to expenses similar to those at hand, the fact that respondent has previously examined a deducted expense in one year, and not disallowed it, does not mean that the expense is a proper deduction in another year. Fleischli v. Commissioner, 123 T.C. , (2004). While the failure to disallow a prior deduction may in certain cases give a taxpayer reasonable cause for later claiming a similar deduction, such is not the case where, as here, the record fails to establish that the facts underlying the earlier deduction are similar to the facts underlying the later deduction. We sustain respondent’s determination as to the accuracy- related penalties. All of the parties’ arguments have been considered, and those arguments not discussed herein have been found to be without merit. To reflect concessions, Decision will be entered under Rule 155.Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Last modified: May 25, 2011