Hradesky v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
Held, petitioner has not substantiated expenses for depreciation, air travel, advertising, business meals and lodging, medical expenses, charitable contributions, and general sales taxes beyond the amounts respondent allowed. Held, further, petitioner, a cash basis taxpayer, can only deduct real estate taxes when a mortgage company pays them to the taxing authority, not when petitioner pays them into the mortgage company's escrow account.
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Petitioner took depreciation deductions on a 1964 Mercury automobile on his 1966 and 1967 returns. Petitioner loaned this car to a friend in 1966; a bank then repossessed it; petitioner did not have the car at the end of 1966 or in 1967. At trial, he admitted he should not have taken depreciation on the 1964 Mercury. He did contend, however, that he should have taken depreciation on a 1965 Chevrolet and a 1966 Rambler, but he offered no documentary evidence of basis or ownership of those automobiles. Petitioner has the burden of substantiating amounts taken for depreciation; we hold he…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Welch v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Vassallo v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1955
- Motel Corp. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1970
- Galt v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1934
3Cited by422 opinions
- HIGBEE v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUEUnited States Tax Court · 2001
- Frank J. Hradesky v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
- Capek v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1986
- Norman B. Tapper and Eileen Tapper v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Lofstrom v. Comm'rUnited States Tax Court · 2005
417 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.