Forrest Jackson - Page 10




                                       - 9 -                                          
             Petitioner claims that she conducted her Packs to Go activity            
        from an apartment in a subsidized low-income housing development              
        known as the Dulles Center Apartments.  She claims she did not                
        live there, an assertion that respondent disputes.  Petitioner’s              
        apartment was furnished with dishes, plants, a sofa, a loveseat,              
        two tables, and a coffee table.                                               
             Petitioner’s lease agreement provided that “the use of the               
        premises for any purpose other than as a private dwelling solely              
        for the use of the Resident” was not permitted.  The lease made no            
        mention of petitioner’s Packs to Go activity.  Moreover, for the              
        first year of the lease (from December of 1999 to December of                 
        2000), petitioner’s nephew was a signatory to the lease.                      
                  Without deciding whether petitioner did or did not live             
        at the Dulles Center Apartments, and even if we were to accept                
        petitioner’s uncorroborated assertions that she conducted her                 
        Packs to Go activity from a low-income apartment unit in violation            
        of her lease agreement, we believe that such a highly unusual                 
        arrangement is inconsistent with conducting a commercial                      
        enterprise in a businesslike manner.                                          
             Petitioner did not keep reliable books and records for her               
        Packs to Go activity.  Only one signed contract between petitioner            
        and a putative client was introduced into evidence.  The receipts             
        that petitioner produced in support of her claims for various                 
        business deductions were inconsistent with or contradictory of her            







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

Last modified: March 27, 2008