- 132 - burden of timely pleading and proving an increase in basis was on petitioners here, and they did not do so in a timely manner. Thus, the starting point for calculation of the Roses’ basis will be the notice of deficiency, and the only adjustments to that amount will be for items conceded by respondent or determined within the scope of our jurisdiction in these cases. Issue #7--The Roses’ Basis in Their SLPC Interest Petitioners contend that the Roses’ basis in their SLPC interest should be increased as a result of the $350,000 transaction that occurred between SLPC, TPC, and Rose during 1994 and the $800,000 transaction that occurred between SLPC, TPC, and Rose during 1995. In support of this contention, petitioners argue that respondent has conceded the bona fides of the transactions between SLPC, TPC, and Rose during 1994 and 1995 through the following stipulation: At December 31, 1994, Mr. Rose paid $350,000 of the amount which St. Louis owed Tampa Pipeline Corporation by reducing the amount which Tampa Pipeline Corporation owed him. The transaction was recorded on Tampa Pipeline Corporation’s books by a journal entry reducing the amount which it owed Rose by $350,000 and reducing the amount which St. Louis Pipeline owed it by $350,000. The transaction was recorded in the audited financial statements and tax returns for 1994. The transaction was reflected on the books of St. Louis Pipeline by a journal entry reflecting a $350,000 reduction it owed Tampa Pipeline Company and an increase of $350,000 in the amount it owed Rose. During 1995, Rose paid an additional $800,000 ofPage: Previous 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011