- 20 -
Petitioner contends that he first entered the restaurant
business in 2000 when he claims he worked at his uncle’s restau-
rant in Windsor, California, with the understanding that his
uncle intended to sell him his restaurant. As a result, peti-
tioner argues, he is entitled to deduct certain amounts that he
incurred during 2001 in investigating the acquisition of a
restaurant in Dallas, Texas. Respondent disagrees.
The record establishes that during 2000 petitioner did not
purchase his uncle’s restaurant and that he did not operate a
restaurant at any time during that year or the following year,
which is the year at issue.
On the record before us, we find that petitioner has failed
to carry his burden of establishing that he is entitled for his
taxable year 2001 to the net loss that he claimed in the restau-
rant Schedule C.14
13(...continued)
opinion 884 F.2d 1393 (6th Cir. 1989); see also Specialty Rests.
Corp. & Subs. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-221.
14Assuming arguendo that petitioner had established the
deductibility under sec. 162(a) of the travel, meal, and enter-
tainment expenses claimed in the restaurant Schedule C, he would
still have to satisfy the requirements of sec. 274(d). We
concluded above that we shall not rely on petitioner’s credit
card statements, petitioner’s ticket stubs, or petitioner’s
testimony with respect to his claimed expenses to establish
petitioner’s position regarding such expenses, including the
travel, meal, and entertainment expenses claimed in the restau-
rant Schedule C. On the record before us, we find that peti-
tioner has failed to carry his burden of establishing all of the
elements that he must prove in order to satisfy the requirements
under sec. 274(d) for such expenses. See sec. 1.274-5T(b)(2),
(continued...)
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011