V.R. DeAngelis M.D.P.C. & R.T. Domingo M.D.P.C., V. R. DeAngelis M.D.P.C., Tax Matters Partner, et al. - Page 57




                                       - 57 -                                         
          Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner, supra at 84 (discussing the               
          standards that the Court applies to evaluate the testimony of               
          trial witnesses).  We rely mainly on the testimony of Mr. DeWeese           
          and the voluminous record built by the parties through their                
          comprehensive stipulation of facts and exhibits.                            
          III.  Substantive Issues at Hand                                            
               A.  Disallowance of Deductions                                         
               Section 162(a) generally provides that “There shall be                 
          allowed as a deduction all the ordinary and necessary expenses              
          paid or incurred during the taxable year in carrying on any trade           
          or business”.  A taxpayer such as VRD/RTD or one of the PCs must            
          meet five requirements in order to deduct an item under this                
          section.  The taxpayer must prove that the item claimed as a                
          deductible business expense:  (1) Was paid or incurred during the           
          taxable year; (2) was for carrying on its trade or business;                
          (3) was an expense; (4) was a necessary expense; and (5) was an             
          ordinary expense.20  See Commissioner v. Lincoln Sav. & Loan                
          Association, 403 U.S. 345, 352 (1971); Welch v. Helvering,                  
          290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933); see also Rule 142(a)(1).  A                       
          determination of whether an expenditure satisfies each of these             




               20 While sec. 7491(a) places the burden of proof upon the              
          Commissioner in certain cases, the Court has decided in an                  
          unpublished order that sec. 7491(a) has no applicability to these           
          cases.                                                                      






Page:  Previous  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  Next 

Last modified: March 27, 2008