- 4 - Charitable deduction –- –- 50,000 –- Excess rent--Stanford –- 40,067 46,560 63,444 Rent--Lowell 29,400 29,400 31,020 41,736 Director’s fees 6,000 23,000 42,000 49,000 Townsend check –- –- –- 15,000 Travel expenses –- –- –- 3,889 Legal expenses –- –- –- 4,033 Life insurance payments 2,404 2,480 -- 4,781 Education payments -- -- 2,599 9,166 Royalty income 709 -- 570 586 Franklin dividend income 193 691 987 1,072 Forgiveness of debt income -- -- -- 88,291 Employee relations expenses -- -- -- 3,035 Total 629,177 456,500 3,831,923 469,713 1 All figures are rounded to the nearest dollar. 2 Respondent conceded that the Bensons are entitled to a deduction of $77,973 in 1989 with respect to legal expenses. The parties agree that the normal 3-year period of limitations in section 6501(a) would bar assessment of deficiencies for these years unless the exception in section 6501(e) applies. Thus, we must decide whether the 6-year period of limitations provided by section 6501(e)(1) applies to the Bensons’ 1989, 1990, 1993, and 1994 returns.3 Respondent argues that section 6501(e)(1)(A) extended the period of limitations to 6 years because the Bensons omitted gross income in excess of 25 percent of their reported gross income in 1989, 1990, 1993, and 1994. Respondent has the burden of proving that the Bensons omitted more than 25 percent of gross income. See Harlan v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 31, 39 (2001). 3 Respondent had also argued that the exception to the statute of limitations for fraud applied. See sec. 6501(c). In Benson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-272, we found that respondent did not satisfy his burden of proving fraud by clear and convincing evidence.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011