- 22 - the building shell. Mr. King said it cost about $350,000 to repair the building and an additional $300,000 to finish it. Petitioners testified that they had records of these improvements, but they did not produce them or explain why they did not. Mrs. King testified that they received an insurance reimbursement when the building was partially destroyed, but she did not remember the amount or the year that they received it. Petitioners contend that their basis in the Ross Clark building includes $350,000 in damages from the windstorm. However, Mrs. King testified that they received an insurance reimbursement for their expenses of repairing the partially destroyed building shell. The cost of the building ($500,000 for the shell and $300,000 for improvements) totals $800,000, which is the adjusted basis respondent determined. Petitioners have not shown that their adjusted basis exceeds this amount. 3. Whether, Under the Mitigation Provisions (Sections 1311-1314), Petitioners May Deduct More Depreciation for the South Oates Building Than Respondent Allowed Petitioners contend that they did not deduct all allowable depreciation for the South Oates building from 1990-96. Petitioners contend that, under the mitigation provisions (sections 1311-1314), they may (1) deduct more for depreciation for the South Oates building in 1995-96 than respondent allowed, and (2) amend their tax returns for 1990-94 or otherwise use their unclaimed depreciation deductions from those years.Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011