Marlin D. Cutshall, Sr. - Page 4




                                        - 3 -                                         
          142(a)(1); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933).                    
          Moreover, tax deductions are a matter of legislative grace with a           
          taxpayer bearing the burden of proving entitlement to the                   
          deductions claimed.  Rule 142(a)(1); INDOPCO, Inc. v.                       
          Commissioner, 503 U.S. 79, 84 (1992).                                       
               In 1982, petitioner leased a parcel of land on which he and            
          his family ran a small produce stand out of a moveable type                 
          structure.  Petitioner contends that, despite his lease, a “group           
          of lawyers” wanted to build a motel on the land.  Petitioner                
          claims that when he refused to move, “they took a truck in and              
          took everything that I had”.  As a result, petitioner’s produce             
          stand was forced to shut down, and petitioner allegedly sustained           
          a business loss of $10,000.                                                 
               On his 1982 return, petitioner claimed a business loss of              
          $10,000 for his produce stand.  Petitioner’s testimony suggests             
          that he expected the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to reimburse            
          him, in actual dollars, for the business loss claimed on the                
          return.  When petitioner did not receive any form of response               
          from the IRS, he continued to claim a business loss of $10,000 on           
          each and every return that he filed with the IRS after 1982                 
          because he wanted “a sense of fairness from the IRS.”                       



               2(...continued)                                                        
          because petitioner has not produced any evidence that establishes           
          the preconditions for its application.                                      





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007