Vittorio Kellum - Page 9

                                        - 8 -                                         
          with the State of California on April 9, 1997, but was not                  
          awarded any benefits until May 31, 2001.  Petitioner also was               
          awarded disability payments stemming from his 1997 back injury              
          from SCRMA, but the record shows that these payments were made in           
          2000.  Amounts received are included in gross income for the                
          taxable year in which they are received.  Sec. 451(a); Polone v.            
          Commissioner, supra; Knoll v. Commissioner, supra.  Therefore,              
          payments received in 2000 and 2001 are not to be considered in              
          petitioner’s 1997 tax year.                                                 
               As indicated, for taxable year 1997, certified payroll                 
          records from Compton Unified demonstrate that petitioner reported           
          for duty throughout 1997 and was paid his regular salary without            
          any kind of special injury or illness status.  Petitioner did not           
          present any credible evidence to prove that he did not work after           
          March 15, 1997.                                                             
               For the reasons stated above, we sustain respondent’s                  
          determination that petitioner must include $27,325 of wages in              
          gross income for 1997.                                                      
          B.  Charitable Contribution Deduction                                       
               Petitioner claims a deduction for charitable contributions             
          of $4,110 for 1997.  Respondent conceded that petitioner is                 
          entitled to a charitable contribution deduction of $450.  The               
          parties dispute whether petitioner is entitled to a deduction in            








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011