Alec Jeffrey Megibow - Page 14

                                       - 14 -                                         
          expenses presented on a Schedule C form.”  Petitioner asserted              
          that respondent’s disallowance of his claimed expenditures was              
          premised on this concept.                                                   
               As an initial observation, we note that presenting the issue           
          in this abstract manner amounts to little more than a request for           
          an advisory opinion as to Federal tax law.  This Court does not             
          issue advisory opinions in a hypothetical context.  The Court’s             
          rulings are restricted to actual cases and controversies.                   
               Moreover, petitioner’s motion was and is properly rejected             
          because, regardless of the accuracy of the principle he seeks to            
          establish, the purposes of summary judgment would not be served             
          by a ruling thereon.  Trial, having already occurred, would not             
          be avoided.  More importantly, even an order in petitioner’s                
          favor would in no way expedite resolution of this case.                     
          Substantiation would still be required for any allowable                    
          expenses.                                                                   
               The notice of deficiency expressly provides that the                   
          Schedule C deductions for 1997, 1998, and 1999 were disallowed              
          “since you failed to establish that the disallowed portion of the           
          claimed deductions were paid, and if paid, qualified as ordinary            
          and necessary business expenses, or that the expenditures were              
          made for the purposes designated.”  Because the substantiation              
          issue under the actual facts of this case would remain before us,           








Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011