-6- OPINION We are asked to decide whether petitioner may deduct $158,381 as a business bad debt in 1998. Respondent argues that petitioner may not deduct $158,381 as a business bad debt because petitioner has not substantiated the amount of the deduction nor established that the debt became worthless in 1998. Respondent also argues that the accuracy-related penalty should be imposed. Petitioner admits that he does not have records supporting the deduction. Petitioner asserts that respondent is estopped from arguing that petitioner lacks the requisite documentation because respondent audited petitioner’s gross receipts for 1994 and that year has been settled. Petitioner also argues that he has established that Brooks Foods owed Egan Oil more than the $158,381 claimed and that it is irrelevant when petitioner claimed the deduction because the deduction would have resulted in a net operating loss that petitioner could have carried backward or forward under section 172. Sec. 172(b)(1)(A). On this basis, petitioner also argues that the accuracy-related penalty should not be imposed. We address each issue in turn. We begin with the burden of proof. I. Burden of Proof In general, the Commissioner’s determinations in the deficiency notice are presumed correct, and the taxpayer bears the burden of proving that the Commissioner’s determinations are in error. See Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Under certain circumstances, however, section 7491(a)Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011