- 26 - taxpayer. INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992); Interstate Transit Lines v. Commissioner, 319 U.S. 590, 593 (1943); Deputy v. duPont, 308 U.S. 488, 493 (1940); New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934). In the notice of deficiency, respondent determined that petitioner had additional income of $54,802 from WDI for 1995, as a result of the disallowance of deductions on the corporation’s 1995 return in that amount. Petitioner has not shown that WDI is entitled to any of the deductions that were disallowed. We accordingly sustain respondent’s determination that WDI’s deductions totaling $54,802 for 1995 should be disallowed. At trial, respondent also proffered detailed evidence demonstrating that petitioner caused WDI to pay $18,660 in expenditures for yachts, and that these expenditures were deducted on WDI’s 1995 return. While petitioner argues on brief that the yacht-related expenditures deducted by WDI were proper because they were reflected in petitioner’s drawing account, we need not resolve this issue, as respondent has sought no increase in the 1995 deficiency as a result of this evidence.17 17 We surmise that respondent proffered this evidence in support of his determination of fraud.Page: Previous 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011