Mila Alemasov and Victor Popov - Page 5




                                        - 5 -                                         
          $27,000 payment.6  The 2002 return reported as income the                   
          $400,000 settlement fee that had been paid to petitioner by Bank            
          of America and included a Schedule C, Profit or Loss From                   
          Business, relating to an activity with the principal business               
          purpose described as “Real Estate Investments”.  The return                 
          reflected a loss of $31,261 from the Schedule C activity.                   
               Petitioners’ 2002 Federal income tax return was selected for           
          examination.  They were issued information document requests by             
          the IRS and were requested to substantiate the deductions claimed           
          on Schedule C of their 2002 return.  When petitioners did not               
          provide the requested documents timely, respondent issued a 30-             
          day letter proposing to disallow all of the claimed Schedule C              
          expenses.  Petitioners protested the proposed deficiency and                
          engaged the services of an enrolled agent; however, the agent was           
          unable to resolve the matter with respondent’s Appeals Office.              
               Respondent then issued to petitioners a notice of deficiency           
          determining a deficiency of $14,241 in their Federal income tax             
          for 2002.  In the notice of deficiency, respondent disallowed all           
          of petitioners’ claimed Schedule C deductions for 2002 for the              
          reason that                                                                 

               Since you did not establish that the business expense                  
               shown on your tax return was paid or incurred during                   

               6The unpaid portion of the $94,659 is not at issue in this             
          case, and there are indications in the record that petitioners              
          made subsequent payments on the 2002 liability.                             






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

Last modified: November 10, 2007